Back
PANKAJ MITHAL, REKHA BORANA
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Mahaveer S/o Shri Roshan Lal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Shri R.D. Rastogi, learned Additional Solicitor General of India assisted by Mr. Bhanu Pratap Bohra for the appellants and Shri Vikas Balia, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Swaroop Singh Sisodia for the respondents.
2. The Union of India through Ministry of Road, Transport and Highway, the National Highway Authority of India, the Prescribed Authority (Land Acquisition), Additional District Collector and Additional District Magistrate, Rajsamand and the Zonal Officer and Project Director, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Ajmer Road, Jaipur have together preferred this intra-court appeal challenging two orders passed by the writ court.
3. The first is dated 13.12.2018, by which S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.17917/2018 of the respondents Mahaveer & Ors. has been allowed along with connected petitions and the appellants have been directed to get the amount of compensation redetermined by the competent authority for their acquired land in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Rese
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the delay in filing the appeal was unexplained and the subsequent delay condonation application did not provide sufficient cause for the delay....
The court emphasized a liberal approach to condoning delays in land acquisition cases, allowing petitions despite alternative remedies being available.
Judicial intervention in arbitral proceedings is limited; parties must await the final award unless a right of appeal exists, and a liberal approach is adopted for condoning delays in land acquisitio....
Person Aggrieved May File Appeal - Under S.74 of the 2013 Act, it has been provided that a person aggrieved, may file appeal in the High Court within 60 days of passing of an award.
Legal representatives cannot re-agitate disputes over compensation post-finality; delay in appeal without compelling justification is not condoned.
The court emphasized that while a liberal approach is generally applied in condoning delays under the Limitation Act, lack of sufficient cause, particularly evident inactivity, precludes such discret....
A government body cannot benefit from its own negligence; explanations for condonation of delay must be reasonable, and inordinate delay jeopardizes the rights of others.
The court held that appeals filed beyond 120 days without sufficient cause cannot be entertained, emphasizing equal standards for government and private parties in legal proceedings.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
