Dismissed

The Executive Engineeer v. Sri Vittappa Heabaleppa Godachi

Karnataka HC22 Oct 2024MFA/101093/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal under Section 74(1) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act as barred by limitation due to a 185-day delay. The court held that condonation was not permissible, noting pending Supreme Court proceedings on re-determination of market value.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is dismissed as barred by limitation. The jurisdiction of the Reference Court is restored for release of deposited amounts.

The Executive Engineeer Vs Sri Vittappa Heabaleppa Godachi — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15199 MFA No. 101093 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101093 OF 2023 (LAC)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KNNL, GRBCC DIV.NO.2, HIDAKAL DAM, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 309.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. S.M. KALWAD, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SRI. VITTAPPA HEABALEPPA GODACHI, AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: VANNUR, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-590 001.

¶12

THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, HIDAKAL DAM, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI-590 001.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

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

¶16

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.74 (1) OF RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.03.2022 PASSED IN LAC.NO.461/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, BELAGAVI, AND THE LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT AUTHORITY, BELAGAVI AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 2,37,817/- PER ACRE.

¶17

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

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15199 MFA No. 101093 of 2023

¶19

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

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

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

¶22

Learned HCGP takes notice for respondent No.2.

¶23

Notice is not issued to respondent No.1 since the appeal is disposed of on a question of law.

¶24

This appeal is filed under Section 74(1) of the

¶25

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013¹ laying a challenge to the Judgment & Award dated 22.03.2022 passed by the Reference Court in LAC No.461/2019, 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 185 days in filing the appeal.

¶26

Section 74(1) along with the Proviso thereto (sub-section (2) not being relevant) of the 2013 Act is noticed for ready reference:

¶27

1 Hereinafter referred as “the 2013 Act”

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15199 MFA No. 101093 of 2023

¶29

“74. Appeal to High Court.

¶30

(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:

¶31

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.”

¶32

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

¶33

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 liable to be favourably considered. Further, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER³

¶34

2 ILR 2020 KAR 1897

¶35

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

¶36

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15199 MFA No. 101093 of 2023

¶37

has declined the request for referring the matter for

¶38

reconsideration to a larger Bench.

¶39

In view of the aforementioned, the appeal is dismissed as barred by limitation.

¶40

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.

¶41

In view of dismissal of this appeal, the Registry

¶42

to transmit the amount in deposit, if any, to the Reference Court immediately for being released in favour of claimants in accordance with law.

¶43

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶44

ND, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 17

The Executive Engineeer v. Sri Vittappa Heabaleppa Godachi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Executive Engineeer v. Sri Vittappa Heabaleppa Godachi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karnataka Vs the Special

Omkar Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd. Vs Lakkappa Sidaramappa Dabaja

The Executive Engineer Vs Sri Laxmappa Beerappa Surannavar

The Executive Engineer Vs Sri Bhimappa Hanamantappa Kelageri Dead by His Lrs

The Executive Engineer Vs Sri Birappa Sidappa Hosamani

The Executive Engineer Vs Smt. Bhagavva Birappa