Dismissed

The Executive Engineer v. Smt. Bhagavva Birappa

Karnataka HC22 Oct 2024MFA/101195/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This First Appeal filed under Section 74(1) of the 2013 Act challenging a Land Acquisition Award was dismissed as barred by limitation due to a delay of 185 days. The Court held the provision mandatory and denied condonation of delay, clarifying that no merits were examined pending an Apex Court decision.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was dismissed as barred by limitation; the Registry was directed to transmit deposited amount to the Reference Court.

The Executive Engineer Vs Smt. Bhagavva Birappa — Land Acquisition | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15200 MFA No. 101195 of 2023

¶3

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

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101195 OF 2023 (LAC)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

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

¶7

…APPELLANT

¶8

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

¶9

AND:

¶10

SMT. BHAGAVVA BIRAPPA URF DURGAPPA SURANNAVAR AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: VANNUR, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-590 001.

¶11

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

¶12

SAROJA HANGARAKI

¶13

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Date: 2024.11.05 12:57:08 +0530

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶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.459/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, BELAGAVI, AND THE LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT AUTHORITY, BELAGAVI AND ETC.,

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15200 MFA No. 101195 of 2023

¶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 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.459/2019, 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.

¶25

1 Hereinafter referred as “the 2013 Act”

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15200 MFA No. 101195 of 2023

¶27

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

¶28

“ 74. Appeal to High Court.

¶29

(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:

¶30

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.”

¶31

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

¶32

and the proviso thereof of the 2013 Act is clear. Further, a Division Bench of this Court in the case of THE DEPUTY

¶33

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 2 ILR 2020 KAR 1897

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15200 MFA No. 101195 of 2023

¶35

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

¶36

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

¶37

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

¶38

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

¶39

the decision in SLP Nos.215 -2016 of 2023 (M/s S.V Global Mill Limited) pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court.

¶40