This court dismissed the appeal in default. Notices were issued repeatedly to the appellant for filing the appeal, which were received back unserved, and a report indicated the appellant had expired.
Appeal dismissed in default.
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 PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RFA No.1279 of 1986 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.02.2011
Subrati (deceased) through LR
...Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana
.....Respondent
CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present:Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
RAJESH BINDAL, J.
A perusal of the paperbook shows that after the elevation of the counsel, who filed the present appeal to the Bench, repeatedly notices were issued to the appellant. However, the same were received back unserved. There is one report dated 5.3.2004 stating that the appellant had expired.
A perusal of the impugned award shows that for the purpose of assessment of compensation, the learned court below had relied upon its earlier award pertaining to the same acquisition. There is no information available with the court at the moment whether any further enhancement of compensation by this court or Hon’ble the Supreme Court for the land acquired by the same notification, has been granted.
In view of the aforesaid factual situation, this court does not have any other option but to dismiss the appeal in default.
Ordered accordingly.
(RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE
03.02.2011 sharmila
Subrati (deceased) through LR
State of Haryana
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
