Dismissed¶¶11

Lucknow Development Authority Throu Its Secy. v. Rameshwar Prasad Deceased Thro.Legal Representative and Anr.

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2024FAPLD/176/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land acquisition compensation; Lucknow Development Authority; Nagar Mahapalika Tribunal / Additional District Judge, Lucknow; Misc. Case No.3 of 1999; compensation rate Rs.5 per sq. ft.; parity with Division Bench judgment dated 11.10.2012 in First Appeal No.4 of 1998 (Lucknow Development Authority v. Ravindra Nath Singh and others) enhancing connected cases to Rs.5.10 per sq. ft.; compliance with and non-challenge of that judgment; appeal dismissed on appellant counsel's no-objection; First Appeal Defective No. 176 of 2013; decided 19.3.2024; single judge Manjive Shukla, J.

What did the court decide?

None to the appellant; the compensation of Rs.5 per sq. ft. awarded in the reference proceedings stands maintained for the respondents. ¶¶11

Lucknow Development Authority Throu Its Secy. Vs Rameshwar Prasad Deceased Thro.Legal Representative and Anr. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None to the appellant; the compensation of Rs.5 per sq. ft. awarded in the reference proceedings stands maintained for the respondents.

¶¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the First Appeal against the order dated 22.12.2012 of the Nagar Mahapalika Tribunal determining compensation at Rs.5 per sq. ft. should be dismissed, given the Division Bench judgment dated 11.10.2012 in First Appeal No.4 of 1998 relating to the same award, village and scheme, already complied with and unchallenged.

¶¶7

Court's answer

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant/Lucknow Development Authority — including his admission that the judgment dated 11.10.2012 in First Appeal No.4 of 1998 relates to the same award, village and scheme and has been complied with, and his having no objection — this First Appeal is dismissed.

¶¶11

Ratio / Principle

The compensation awarded to the respondents in the reference proceedings at Rs.5 per sq. ft. stands maintained, the First Appeal against the Tribunal's order determining that compensation having been dismissed.

¶¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Manjive Shukla, J. — First Appeal Defective No. 176 of 2013 (Lucknow Development Authority v. Rameshwar Prasad (deceased) through Legal Representative & Anr.), decided 19.3.2024. The Lucknow Development Authority challenged the order dated 22.12.2012 of the Presiding Officer, Nagar Mahapalika Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Lucknow (Misc. Case No.3 of 1999) determining compensation at Rs.5 per sq. ft. for land acquired by the State for the Authority. Counsel for the Authority admitted that the Division Bench judgment dated 11.10.2012 in First Appeal No.4 of 1998 (Lucknow Development Authority v. Ravindra Nath Singh and others) concerned the same award, village and scheme, stood complied with and unchallenged before any higher forum, and raised no objection to dismissal maintaining the Rs.5 per sq. ft. compensation. The First Appeal was accordingly dismissed.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:23953

¶2

Court No. - 20

¶3

Case :- FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 176 of 2013

¶4

Appellant :- Lucknow Development Authority Throu Its Secy. Respondent :- Rameshwar Prasad Deceased Thro.Legal Representative And Anr. Counsel for Appellant :- A.K.Ashtana,Ajay Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Vijay Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri V.K. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2.

¶7

Appellant Lucknow Development Authority through this First Appeal has challenged the order dated 22.12.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, Nagar Mahapalika Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Lucknow in Misc. Case No.3 of 1999. Vide order dated 22.12.2012 compensation has been determined to the tune of Rs.5 per sq. ft. for the land of the respondents acquired by the State for the Lucknow Development Authority.

¶8

Sri V.K. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has placed before this court judgment and order dated 11.10.2012 passed by the Division Bench of this court in First Appeal No.4 of 1998, Lucknow Development Authority Vs. Ravindra Nath Singh and others and other connected First Appeals whereby the same award of compensation relating to same village under the same scheme has been enhanced to the tune of Rs.5.10 per sq. ft. It has further been submitted that aforesaid judgment and order dated 11.10.2012 passed in First Appeal No. 4 of 1998 has been complied with by the Lucknow Development Authority and has not been challenged before any higher forum. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has thus submitted that since they have not filed any appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded in the reference proceedings therefore, they may be entitled for Rs.5 per sq. ft.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant at this stage has admitted that aforesaid judgment and order dated 11.10.2012 passed in First Appeal No.4 of 1998 and connected First Appeals is related to the same award of same village pertaining to same scheme and aforesaid judgment and order dated 11.10.2012 has already been complied with by the Lucknow Development Authority. Learned counsel appearing for the

¶10

appellant/Lucknow Development Authority has further submitted that he has no objection if this appeal is dismissed by maintaining the compensation awarded to the respondents in reference proceedings to the tune of Rs.5 per sq. ft.

¶11

In view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel appearing for appellant/Lucknow Development Authority, this First Appeal is dismissed.

¶12

Order Date :- 19.3.2024 Salim

¶13

Digitally signed by :- SALIM PRAVEJ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Lucknow Development Authority Throu Its Secy. v. Rameshwar Prasad Deceased Thro.Legal Representative and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lucknow Development Authority Throu Its Secy. v. Rameshwar Prasad Deceased Thro.Legal Representative and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar Tewari Vs Smt. Devi and 2 Ors.

Jagat Narain Vs Daulat Khan and Others

Babu Lal and Others Vs Sheetal Prasad Pandey and Others

Sohan Lal Vs Paikarma and Others

U.P.State Road Transport Corporation Thru Reg.Manager Lko. Vs Mahendra Singh and Another

Bimla Devi and Ors. Vs Bab Ghanshyam Das and Ors.