The appellant filed an appeal against an award enhancing compensation for land acquisition beyond the statutory limitation period. Relying on binding Division Bench precedents holding Section 74(1) mandatory, the Court dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation without examining merits.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:15370 MFA No. 101196 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101196 OF 2023 (LAC)
BETWEEN:
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KNNL, GRBCC DIV.NO.2, HIDAKAL DAM, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI – 591 309.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI S. M. KALWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
SAROJAHANGARAKI Digitallysigned bySAROJAHANGARAKIDate:2024.11.0611:09:13+0530
(BY SMT. KIRTILATA R. PATIL, HCGP, FOR R2)
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.470/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AND THE LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT AUTHORITY, BELAGAVI AND ETC.,
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
NC: 2024:KHC-D:15370 MFA No. 101196 of 2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)
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.
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
1 Hereinafter referred as “the 2013 Act”
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.”
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 has declined the request for referring the matter for reconsideration to a larger Bench.
2 ILR 2020 KAR 1897
3 Order dated 23.09.2024 passed in MFA No.102543/2022
NC: 2024:KHC-D:15370 MFA No. 101196 of 2023
dismissed as barred by limitation.
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.
to transmit the amount in deposit, if any, to the Reference
Court immediately for being released in favour of claimants in accordance with law.
Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE
ND CT-ASC List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal filed under Section 74(1) of the 2013 Act was maintainable given the delay of 185 days beyond the prescribed limit?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BENGALURU VS. M/S. S.V. GLOBAL MILL LIMITED, CHENNAIRelied on¶37
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BENGALURU VS. M/S. S.V. GLOBAL MILL LIMITED, CHENNAI ILR 2020 KAR 1897
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERReferred¶38
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Order dated 23.09.2024 passed in MFA No.102543/2022
1 provisions across 1 enactments
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KNNL, GRBCC DIV.NO.2, HIDAKAL DAM, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI
SRI IRAPPA SIDAPPA GODACHI
THE SPL. AND ACQUISITION OFFICER, HIDAKAL DAM, TQ: HUKKERI, DIST: BELAGAVI
C.M. POONACHA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
