Dismissed

Belo Ram Alias Beli Ram and Others v. Union of India and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC30 Oct 2019RFA/2540/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an appeal and related applications against a Reference Court's award due to a delay of over 4.5 decades. The court held that the cause of action died with the original landowners and no sufficient cause was made out for condoning the severe limitation breach.

What did the court decide?

Applications for condonation of delay and bringing legal representatives on record were not allowed; the main appeal was dismissed.

Belo Ram Alias Beli Ram and Others Vs Union of… — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

Shivani Gupta 2019.11.04 15:05 1

¶2

RFA No. 2540 of 2019 (O & M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

RFA No. 2540 of 2019 (O & M) Date of decision: 30.10.2019

¶5

Belo Ram @ Beli Ram (D) through L.Rs. and others

....Appellant(s)

Versus

UOI and others

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA

¶11

Present: Mr. R.S. Manhas, Advocate, for the appellants.

¶12

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral)

¶13

The appeal is directed against the award of the Reference Court, Gurdaspur dated 01.06.1981 for the notification dated 02.12.1977. The appeal is barred by delay of 13772 days in filing the same. It has been stated that appellant no. 1-Belo Ram was looking after the case and died on 23.10.1984 and, therefore, the delay as such has occurred.

¶14

Applications for bringing on record the legal representatives of appellant no. 1-Belo Ram and other appellants no. 2, 3, 5 and 6 have also been filed. The said original land owners have died way back in the years 1984, 2004, 2011, 1997 and 2006 respectively. The cause of action as such died alongwith the said land owners and the appeal filed now after 4 decades would not be maintainable as no sufficient cause is made out in the facts and circumstances. Reliance though has been placed upon the judgments of the Apex Court in Imrat Lal and others vs. Land Acquisition Collector and others, 2014 (14) SCC 133 and Dhiraj Singh (D) through

¶15

L.Rs. and others vs. Haryana State and others, 2014 (14) SCC 127. However, the Apex Court in the said cases has condoned the delay of 12

¶16

RFA No. 2540 of 2019 (O & M)

¶17

¶18

years but in the present case, the delay is of more than 4-1/2 decades. In such circumstances this Court is loath to interfere with the award as such. The law of limitation may be harsh but it cannot be thrown out of the window at the asking of the litigants.

¶19

Accordingly, this Court is of the opinion that neither the application for condonation of delay is to be allowed as no sufficient cause is made out nor the applications for bringing on record the legal representatives are liable to be allowed.

¶20

Resultantly, the applications alongwith the main appeal stand

¶21

dismissed.

¶22

30.10.2019 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE

¶23

Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

Belo Ram Alias Beli Ram and Others v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Belo Ram Alias Beli Ram and Others v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Haryana State Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Vs Azad Singh and Others

Haryana State Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Vs Rohtash and Others

Suresh Kumar Vs State of Haryana through Land Acquisition Collector Urban Estate Officer Haryana Hissar

Asarfi and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Rumal and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.