Dismissed

The Karnataka Niravari Nigam Ltd., v. Sri Mayappa Laxaman Dalavayi

Karnataka HC23 Oct 2024MFA/101069/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a Miscellaneous First Appeal filed under Section 74(1) of the 2013 Act for land acquisition compensation. The appeal was rejected for significant delay without sufficient cause, citing statutory mandatory timelines and precedent, without merits examination.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; amount in deposit to be transmitted to Reference Court immediately.

The Karnataka Niravari Nigam Ltd., Vs Sri Mayappa Laxaman… — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15366 MFA No. 101069 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶4

DHARWAD BENCH

¶5

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101069 OF 2023 (LAC)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

THE KARNATAKA NIRAVARI NIGAM LTD., HBC ATHANI-591304 R/BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI. S M KALWAD,ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI MAYAPPA LAXAMAN DALAVAYI AGE.48 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O. SATTI TQ. ATHANI DIST. BELAGAVI-591304

¶15

SAROJA HANGARAKI

¶16

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Date: 2024.11.06 11:06:36 +0530

¶17

THE SPL. AND ACQUISITION OFFICER HBC, ATHANI, TQ. ATHANI, DIST. BELAGAVI-591304

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT.KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP, FOR R2)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.74 (1) OF RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.02.2022 MADE IN L.A.C.NO. 1224/2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND THE LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT AUTHORITY, BELAGAVI BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15366 MFA No. 101069 of 2023

¶24

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)

¶27

Learned HCGP takes notice for respondent No.2. Notice is not issued to respondent No.1 since the appeal is disposed of on a question of law.

¶28

This appeal is filed under Section 74(1) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013¹ laying a challenge to the Judgment & Award dated 11.02.2022 passed by the Reference Court in LAC No.1224/2018, whereunder enhancement of compensation has been accorded. The above appeal is filed beyond the prescribed period of 60 + 60 = 120 days and there is a delay of 231 days in filing the appeal. An application is filed seeking condonation of delay.

¶29

1 Hereinafter referred as “the 2013 Act”

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15366 MFA No. 101069 of 2023

¶31

Section 74(1) along with the Proviso thereto

¶32

(sub-section (2) not being relevant) of the 2013 Act is noticed for ready reference:

¶33

“ 74. Appeal to High Court.

¶34

(1) The Requiring Body or any person aggrieved by the Award passed by an Authority under section 69 may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of Award:

¶35

Provided that the High Court may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days.”

¶36

The language of Sub-section (1) of Section 74

¶37

and the proviso thereof of the 2013 Act is clear. Further, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BENGALURU VS. M/S. S.V. GLOBAL MILL LIMITED, CHENNAI² , has examined the matter in great detail and held that Section 74 of the 2013 Act is mandatory in nature and an application for condonation of delay beyond the statutorily permissible time limit is not

¶38

2 ILR 2020 KAR 1897

¶39

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15366 MFA No. 101069 of 2023

¶40

liable to be favourably considered. Further, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of THE EXECUTIVE

¶41

ENGINEER VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER³ has declined the request for referring the matter for reconsideration to a larger Bench.

¶42

In view of the aforementioned, the application

¶43

seeking condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed.

¶44

It is made clear that this Court has not examined the matter on merits with regard to the sustainability of re-determination of market value and consequent enhancement of compensation awarded by the reference Court. The dismissal of this appeal is subject to the decision in SLP Nos.215 -2016 of 2023 (M/s S.V Global Mill Limited) pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court.

¶45