Dismissed

The Karnataka Niravari Nigam Ltd., v. Sri Chikkappa Bantappa Shinge

Karnataka HC23 Oct 2024MFA/101090/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Land acquisition appeal filed 225 days late. Following Division Bench precedent holding Section 74 of the 2013 Act mandatory, the court refused to condone the delay, dismissed the appeal without examining merits, and directed release of deposited amounts to claimants.

What did the court decide?

Delay condonation dismissed; appeal dismissed; amount in deposit to be transmitted to the Reference Court for release to claimants.

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

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15368 MFA No. 101090 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

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

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101090 OF 2023 (LAC)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

THE KARNATAKA NIRAVARI NIGAM LTD., HBC, ATHANI, REP. BYY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI S. M. KALWAD, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI CHIKKAPPA BANTAPPA SHINGE, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: SATTI, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI – 591 304.

¶14

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

SRI. YAMANAPPA BANTAPPA SHINGE, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: SATTI, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI – 591 304.

¶16

SRI. BANTAPPA YAMANAPPA SHINGE, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: SATTI, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶17

THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, HBC, ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP, FOR R4)

¶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 25.02.2022 MADE IN L.A.C.NO. 1211/2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND THE LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND

¶21

¶22

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15368 MFA No. 101090 of 2023

¶23

RESETTLEMENT AUTHORITY, BELAGAVI BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

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

¶28

Learned HCGP takes notice for respondent No.4. Notice is not issued to respondent Nos.1 to 3 since the appeal is disposed of on a question of law.

¶29

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 25.02.2022 passed by the Reference Court in LAC No.1211/2018, 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

¶30

1 Hereinafter referred as “the 2013 Act”

¶31

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15368 MFA No. 101090 of 2023

¶32

delay of 225 days in filing the appeal. An application is filed seeking condonation of delay.

¶33

Section 74(1) along with the Proviso thereto

¶34

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

¶35

“ 74. Appeal to High Court.

¶36

(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:

¶37

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.”

¶38

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

¶39

and the proviso thereof of the 2013 Act is clear. Further, a

¶40

Division Bench of this Court in the case of THE DEPUTY

¶41

COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION

¶42

OFFICER, BENGALURU VS. M/S. S.V. GLOBAL MILL

¶43

LIMITED, CHENNAI² , has examined the matter in great

¶44

detail and held that Section 74 of the 2013 Act is

¶45

2 ILR 2020 KAR 1897

¶46

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15368 MFA No. 101090 of 2023

¶47

mandatory in nature and an application for condonation of delay beyond the statutorily permissible time limit is not liable to be favourably considered. Further, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER³ has declined the request for referring the matter for reconsideration to a larger Bench.

¶48

In view of the aforementioned, the application seeking condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed.

¶49

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.

¶50

3 Order dated 23.09.2024 passed in MFA No.102543/2022

¶51

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15368 MFA No. 101090 of 2023

¶53