Land acquisition appeal filed 225 days late. Court held Section 74(1) RFCTLARR Act's time limit is mandatory per prior Division Bench decisions, dismissed the condonation application and the appeal without examining merits, subject to a pending Supreme Court SLP.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101091 OF 2023 (LAC-)
BETWEEN:
THE KARNATAKA NIRAVARI NIGAM LTD., HCB, ATHANI-591304, REP BY IS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S.M. KALWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SAROJA HANGARAKI
Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R4)
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. 1215/2018 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.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)
Learned HCGP takes notice for respondent No.4. Notice is not issued to other respondents, since the appeal is disposed off on a question of law.
1 Hereinafter referred as “the 2013 Act”
(sub-section (2) not being relevant) of the 2013 Act is noticed for ready reference:
“74. Appeal to High Court.
(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:
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.”
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 liable to be
2 ILR 2020 KAR 1897
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.
seeking condonation of delay is dismissed. Consequently, the appeal is also dismissed.
3 Order dated 23.09.2024 passed in MFA No.102543/2022
Court immediately for being released in favour of claimants
in accordance with law.
Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE
sh
st: vp, LIST NO.: 2 SL NO.: 10
1 issue framed by the court
Whether delay of 225 days in filing the appeal beyond the statutory 120-day limit under Section 74(1) RFCTLARR Act can be condoned.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERReferred¶4
Order dated 23.09.2024 passed in MFA No.102543/2022
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The Karnataka Niravari Nigam Ltd., HCB, Athani, rep by its Executive Engineer
Sri Satteppa Sadashiv Madar
Sri Ashok Sadashiv Madar
Sri Suresh Sadashiv Madar
The Spl. Land Acquisition Officer HBC, Athani
C.M. Poonacha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
