Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow Thru. Secy. vs Molhey

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

FIRST APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 178 of 2024

Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow Thru. Secy.

Secy. .....Appellant(s) Versus Molhey .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Appellant(s) : Rajnish Kumar Singh, Bhanu Bajpai, Mukund Tewari Counsel for Respondent(s) : Amardeep Yadav

¶5

Court No. - 20

¶6

HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J.

¶7

C.M. Application No.2 of 2024

¶8

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

¶9

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

¶10

The office has reported delay of 278 days in filing the instant appeal.

¶11

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the delay so occasioned was not deliberate and occurred due to the requirement of obtaining multiple permissions and completing necessary formalities.

¶12

Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the application.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

Office to register and allot the regular number.

¶16

FAPLD No. 178 of 2024

¶17

2

¶18

Order on appeal

¶19

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

¶20

The instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 08.12.2023 and formal order dated 27.12.2023 passed by the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Tribunal, Lucknow Division, Lucknow in Reference Case No.174 of 2011.

¶21

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the entire compensation was determined on the basis of a void sale deed, which 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 the exemplar sale deed ought to have been prior to the issuance of the said notification.

¶22

In view of above, the matter requires consideration.

¶23

Admit.

¶24

Since Shri Amardeep Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent is present, there is no need to issue notice to the respondent.

¶25

Summon the record of Tribunal concerned.

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

List on 12.05.2026 for final disposal.

¶29

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

¶30

FAPLD No. 178 of 2024

¶31

3

¶32

further order passed in this appeal.

¶33