Dismissed

The Manager v. Leema Natal Baik Kom Santan

Karnataka HC18 Dec 2023MFA/100075/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a miscellaneous first appeal under Section 54(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against a judgment awarding compensation. The appellant contested the low market value determined by the Reference Court for 00.07 annas of land. Finding that the dispute involves a high value exceeding the High Court's pecuniary jurisdiction, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. Liberty was granted

What did the court decide?

Office objection sustained; appeal dismissed as not maintainable; liberty to file appeal before the District Court; refund of court fee.

The Manager Vs Leema Natal Baik Kom Santan — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:14815 MFA No. 100075 of 2020

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100075/2020 (LAC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

A.P.M.C. SIDDAPUR, DIST: NORTH KANARA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI VISHWANTH HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

LEEMA NATAL BAIK KOM SANTAN, DECEASED BY HER LRS.

¶14

DUMING SANTAN LEEMA, AGE:77 YEARS, OCC: X-SERVICEMAN, R/O: APMC ROAD, TQ: SIDDAPUR, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA – 581 329.

¶15

Digitally signed by SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR

¶16

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITIION OFFICER, SIRSI – 581 401, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.54(1) OF LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND PRL. JMFC, SIRSI, ITINERARY COURT AT SIDDAPUR, IN LAC NO.08/2012, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND ETC.,

¶19

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

NC: 2023:KHC-D:14815 MFA No. 100075 of 2020

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The subject matter of the appeal is only 00.07 annas of land. The reference Court determined its market value at Rs.2,50,040/-.

¶24

The beneficiary being aggrieved by the determining of Rs.35,720/- per anna as it is on higher side, filed the appeal. Therefore, the appeal being valued at Rs.3,49,718/-, is not maintainable in this Court. Therefore office objection is sustained and thus the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶25

However, liberty is reserved to the appellant to file appeal before the District Court. Whatever time spent in prosecuting this appeal is excluded as per section 14 of the Limitation Act.

¶26

Registry to refund the entire Court fee paid in this appeal, to the appellant.

¶27

The certified copies produced along with the memorandum of appeal shall be returned to the appellant

¶28

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC-D:14815 MFA No. 100075 of 2020

¶30

by keeping a copy of the same in this appeal at the cost of

¶31

appellant.

¶32

SD/JUDGE

¶33

MRK List No.: 5 Sl No.: 6 CT-ASC

The Manager v. Leema Natal Baik Kom Santan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Manager v. Leema Natal Baik Kom Santan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Annagouda Linganagouda Desai Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

The Executive Engineer Vs the Spl. Land Acquisition Officer

Chandrashekhar S/O K.Ningappa Vs Sannegoud S/O Kallegouda

Mr.Murtuza Baig S/O Usman Baig, Vs Samiulla S/O S.A. Najeer Ahammad

Belgaum Urban Development Authority Vs Sri.Vasant Kallappa Jadhav

The Manager Vs Manjuanth Rama Naik