Lucknow Developement Authority, Lucknow Thru. Secy. vs Ram Sagar and Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 131 of 2024

¶3

Lucknow Developement Authority, Lucknow Thru. Secy.

¶4

.....Appellant(s)

¶5

	Versus
Ram Sagar And Others	.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) Counsel for Respondent(s)	: Rajnish Kumar Singh, Bhanu Bajpai, Mukund Tewari : Amardeep Yadav, Syed Anzar Husain

¶6

Court No. - 20

¶7

HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J.

¶8

C.M. Application No.2 of 2024

¶9

This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal.

¶10

Heard Shri Mukund Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Bhanu Bajpai, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Shri Amardeep Yadav and Shri Syed Anzar Husain, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.

¶11

The office has reported delay of 247 days in filing the instant appeal.

¶12

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the delay calculated by the Registry is incorrect, as due to a typographical error, a wrong provision was mentioned in the memo of appeal, the instant appeal has been filed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Hence, the limitation period ought to be 90 days and not 60 days. Accordingly, the actual delay is only 217 days. He further submits that the delay so occasioned was not deliberate and occurred due to the requirement of obtaining multiple permissions and completing necessary formalities

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the application.

¶14

Cause shown in the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application is sufficient to the satisfaction of the Court.

¶15

FAPLD No. 131 of 2024

¶16

2

¶17

Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

¶18

Office to register and allot the regular number.

¶19

Order on appeal

¶20

Heard Shri Mukund Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Bhanu Bajpai, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Shri Amardeep Yadav and Shri Syed Anzar Husain, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record.

¶21

The instant appeal has been preferred under the Land Acquisition Act 1984 against the judgment and decree dated 16.11.2023 and formal order dated 13.12.2023 passed by the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Tribunal, Lucknow Division, Lucknow in Reference Case No.203 of 2011.

¶22

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the entire compensation was determined on the basis of a void sale deed and the same was relied upon as an exemplar. He further submits that the exemplar relied upon is subsequent to the notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, whereas it ought to have been prior to the issuance of the said notification.

¶23

In view of above, the matter requires consideration.

¶24

Admit.

¶25

Since Shri Amardeep Yadav and Shri Syed Anzar Husain, learned counsel for the respondents are present, there is no need to issue notice to the respondents.

¶26

Summon the record of Tribunal concerned.

¶27

Steps for summoning lower court record to be taken within seven working days from today.

¶28

Two weeks' time is granted to the respondent to file objection. One week time thereafter shall be available to the appellant to file rejoinder, if any.

¶29

List on 12.05.2026 for final disposal.

¶30

FAPLD No. 131 of 2024

¶31

3

¶32

The appellant is directed to deposit the entire amount of compensation along with upto date interest in pursuance of the impugned judgement and order before the court concerned within two weeks from today, if the same has already not been deposited. Upon deposit of the aforesaid amount, the same shall be invested in a nationalized bank under the highest rate of interest bearing fixed deposit, which shall be subject to the further order passed in this appeal.

¶33

The operation and implementation of the impugned order shall remain stayed until further orders.

¶34

(Prashant Kumar,J.)

¶35

April 6, 2026 Anupam S/-

¶36

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM SINGH PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Lucknow Developement Authority, Lucknow Thru. Secy. v. Ram Sagar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lucknow Developement Authority, Lucknow Thru. Secy. v. Ram Sagar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

U.O.I. Thru. General Manager North Central, Railway, Prayagraj vs Mohini Giri and 4 Others

Anjum Ara vs State of Up and Another

Seema Pandey vs Bank of India, Branch Satrikh Dehat, Barabanki Thru. Its Branch Manager

Lucknow Development Authority, Lko. Thru. Secy. vs Molhey

Shailesh Kumar and 3 Others vs Surendra Kumar

Renu Tripathi and Another vs Sri. Subedar Shatrohan Maurya and Others