Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Sandeep Sharma, J.
State Of Himachal Pradesh Through Its Principal Secretary (PWD) To The Government Of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla - Appellant
Vs.
Hoshiar Singh Son Of Late Shri Bhagwan Singh - Respondent
Civil Misc. Petition (Main) Nos. 1347 to1351 & 1362 Of 2022
Decided On : 27-10-2022
Limitation Act, - Section 5, 29, (2), 4 to 24 - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 11, 30(1)-(3), 72, 84, 74, (1), 69 - Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Section 25 - Indian Easements Act, 1882 - Section 2 - General Clauses Act, 1899 - Section 9 – Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 300A - Enhancement of Compensation - Condoning Delay - Land Acquisition Collector assessed value of land and awarded compulsory acquisition charges - Claimants being aggrieved on account of quantum of compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Collector filed reference petitions praying therein for enhancement of compensation - As per report of Registry, there is delay of one year, eight months and four days in maintaining all appeals. Para 14.
Finding of the Court :
Application of Sections 12 to 14 of Limitation Act is in order to advance justice as reasons for exclusion of periods mentioned in those Sections while computing limitation period are those which are beyond control of party seeking to file an appeal to High Court - In same vein Section 4 of Limitation Act is applicable - Thus, a pedantic interpretation of 2013 Act must be avoided - It must be interpreted in such a manner that judicial dicta with regard to applicability of a distinct limitation period under Special Act in light of Section 29(2) of Limitation Act on one hand, is balanced with Constitutional right of a land-loser on other hand - This would also advance cause of justice of stake holders involved in acquisition of land under 2013 Act as in instant case - In view of detailed discussion made supra, this court is of view that applications under S.5 of Limitation Act are not maintainable for condoning delay in filing appeals under S.74 of 2013 Act, in view of specific bar under S.74(1) of said Act, whereby specific period of limitation has been given as 60 days, which can be extended upto further 60 days - Thus, no appeal beyond period of total 120 days (60+60 days) is maintainable.
Result: Applications dismissed.
ORDER :
Since by way of above captioned applications filed under S.5 of Limitation Act, prayer has been made on behalf of the applicants for condoning the delay in filing the accompanying appeals filed under S.74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter, ‘2013 Act’) against a common award dated 3.10.2020 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh in Land Reference Petitions Nos. 2 of 2018 RBT No. 8/18 (CMP(M) No. 1347 of 2022), 4 of 2018 RBT No. 4/18 (CMP(M) No. 1348 of 2022), 5 of 2018 RBT No. 5/18 (CMP(M) No. 1349 of 2022), 9 of 2018 (CMP(M) No. 1350 of 2022) 10 of 2018 (CMP(M) No. 1351 of 2022) and 8 of 2018 (CMP(M) No. 1362 of 2022), all the applications were clubbed and heard together and are now being disposed of vide common order.
2. Though, vide order dated 17.10.2022, this court, while issuing notices to the respondents, granted time to file replies to the applications, but Learned Counsel appearing for the non-applicant(s), while inviting attention of this Court to judgment dated 25.9.2019 passed by High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in case titled The Deputy Commissioner vs. M/S S V Global Mill Limited, vehemently argued that the applications filed for condonation of delay as detailed herein above, are not maintainable and deserve to be dismissed out rightly. However, this Court enabling learned Additional Advocate General to go through aforesaid judgment, adjourned the matter for today.
3. Precisely, the facts relevant for the adjudication of the present applications are that the Superintending Engineer, 8th Circle, Hamirpur, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with award dated 3.10.2020 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Hamirpur in the land reference petitions as detailed herein above, has filed Regular First Appeals under S.74 of the 2013 Act but since there is delay of around one year, eight months and four days in all the appeals, applications under S.5 of the Limitation Act, which are being considered and decided by way of instant order, have been filed praying therein for condonation of delay.
4. Government of Himachal Pradesh issued Notification dated 31.7.2015/28.10.2015, under S.11 of the 2013 Act, for acquisition of the land comprising of Khasra Nos. 48, 51, 55, 58, 61, 74 and 75/1, measuring 0-26-47 hectares situate in Village Jalari Badiara, Tehsil Nadaun, District Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh for the construction of “Nadaun-Sujanpur via Bara road”. District Collector, Hamirpur and approved the rate of Rs.1,000/- per square metres vide letter dated 11.1.2017 which was found just and fair by the Land Acquisition Collector. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the value of the land at Rs. 26,47,000/- and also awarded compulsory acquisition charges amounting to Rs. 26,47,000/- and additional market value @12% per annum under S.30(1)-(3) of the 2013 Act with effect from 31.7.2015 to 38.2.2017 and 9.12.2015 to 28.2.2017, amounting to Rs. 4,80,634/- and thus total compensation amounting to Rs. 57,74,634/- was awarded in favour of the respondents/claimants, claimants being aggrieved on account of quantum of compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Collector filed reference petitions praying therein for enhancement of compensation. Reference Court held the claimants entitled for compensation qua acquired land @Rs.1050/- and consortium @100% and additional amount at the rate of 12% of the market value with effect from 31.7.2015 till 29.5.2017, interest by way of damages @ 11% of market value w.e.f. 9.7.1968 till 31.7.2015 and 15% from the date of Notification dated 31.7.2015 till the date of payment as per provisions of Ss. 72 and 84 of the 2013 Act.
5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid award passed by Reference Court below, applicants have approached this Court by way of regular first appeals under S.74 of the 2013 Act, which have been not registered yet on account of delay
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.
The court ruled that under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013, appeals must be filed within 120 days, and the court has no power to condone delays beyond th....
The court ruled that under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013, appeals must be filed within 120 days, and the court has no power to condone delays beyond th....
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.
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the law of limitation has to be applied with rigor, and a satisfactory explanation is required for condonation of delay.
(1) Law of limitation is founded on public policy – Appeal which is preferred after expiry of limitation is liable to be dismissed.(2) Bar of limitation – Delay is not liable to be condoned merely be....
The court emphasized that the State should not face stricter standards in delay condonation, allowing a 28-day delay due to bona fide reasons including bureaucratic processes and COVID-19 lockdown.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority cannot condone delay beyond the maximum statutory period as prescribed by the relevant provisions of the Act of 2013.
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
