Karnataka High Court
A Gopal Reddy vs Defence Estate Office on 24 March, 2022
Bench: S.Sujatha, Shivashankar Amarannavar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
WRIT PETITION No.11372/2017
C/W
WRIT PETITION Nos.4871/2017, 11369/2017,
11370/2017, 11373/2017, 11374/2017,
12049/2017, 12050/2017, 12488/2017,
12489/2017 & 12965/2017(GM-RES)
W.P. No. 11372/2017:
BETWEEN :
1. G PAPAIAH REDDY
S/O GUNDAPPA
2. SMT.NAGARATHNA
W/O G.PAPAIAH REDDY,
BOTH ARE DEAD BY THEIR LR'S.
3. P.PRAKASH
S/O PAPAIAH REDDY
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC:NIL.
4. SRINIVASH REDDY
S/O PAPAIAH REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
-2-
OCC:NIL.
BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF
KAGGADASAPURA, K.R.PURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU-560 093.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE,
K.KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 042
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V.TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
AMBEDKAR ROAD
BENGALURU -560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER
JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH
COURT LOK-ADALATH COMMITTEE, BENGALURU IN
M.F.A.No.5397/1999 [LA.NO.220/2001] DTD.27.8.2001
VIDE ANNEX-A & B.
-3-
W.P. No.4871/2017
BETWEEN:
1. A GOPAL REDDY
S/O ANKAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS.
OCC:NIL.
2. A.AANAND
S/O ANKAPPA,
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S.
2(a) M.RADHA,
W/O ANAND,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
OCC:NIL.
2(b) MANJUNATH
S/O ANAND,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
OCC:NIL, ALL ARE
R/O KAGGADASAPUR
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU-560 093.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE,
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE,
K.KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 042
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
-4-
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V.TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHANTHI BHUSHAN, ASG, FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGMENT & AWARD PASSED
BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH COMMITTEE,
BENGALURU IN MFA No.5403/1999(LA.NO.226/2001)
DTD.27.8.2001 VIDE ANNEX-A & B.
W.P. No.11369/2017
BETWEEN:
1. POOJAPPA
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS
1(a) VENKATAPPA
S/O LATE POOJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
1(b) SMT. VENKATAMMA
D/O LATE POOJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
1(c) CHIKKAVENKATAPPA
S/O LATE POOJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
-5-
1(d) SMT. GOURAMMA
D/O LATE POOJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
1(e) MUNIYAPPA
S/O LATE POOJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
1(f) P. NARAYANAPPA
S/O LATE POOJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
1(g) P. KRISHNAPPA
S/O LATE POOJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
ALL ARE R/O KAGGADASAPURA
K.R.PURA HOBLI
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 093.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE
K. KAMARAJ ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 042.
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V. TOWER, 3RD FLOOR
-6-
DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGEMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOKADALATH
COMMITTEE, BENGALURU IN MFA NO.5409/99 [LOK
ADALATH NO.231/2001] DTD:21.9.2001 VIDE ANNEXURES
A & B.
W.P. No.11370/2017:
BETWEEN:
1. K NANJAREDDY
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
1(a) M.K.NARAYANA REDDY
S/O KRISHNA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS
2. SMT. RATNAMMA
W/O R.MUNI REDDY,
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LRS
R.MUNI REDDY
S/O N. RAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/O KAGGADASAPURA
K.R.PURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 093.
...PETITIONERS
-7-
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE,
K. KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 042.
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V. TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH
COMMITTEE, BENGALURU IN M.F.A.5405/1999 (LA
No.215/2001) DATED 3.09.2001 VIDE ANNEX-A AND B.
W.P. No.11373/2017
BETWEEN:
SMT. NEELAMMA
D/O CHINNAMMA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSE WIFE,
R/O KAGGADASAPURA,
K.R. PURA HOBLI,
-8-
BENGLAURU EAST TALUK,
BENGLAURU -560 093. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE,
REP. BY ITS
DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER,
K. KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 042.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V. TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH
COMMITTEE, BENGALURU IN M.F.A.5412/1999 (LA
NO.241/2001) DATED 27.08.2001 VIDE ANNEX-A AND B.
W.P. No.11374/2017
BETWEEN:
1. A GOPAL REDDY
S/O ANKAPPA
AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS
OCC: NIL.
-9-
2. A. ANAND
S/O ANKAPPA
SINCE DEAD BY HIS L.RS.
2(a) M. RADHA,
W/O ANAND,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
OCC: NIL.
2(b) MANJUNATHA
S/O ANAND
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
OCC: NIL.
ALL ARE R/O KAGGADASAPURA,
K.R. PURA HOBLI,
BENGLAURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 092.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE,
K. KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 042.
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V. TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
DR. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
- 10 -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH
COMMITTEE BENGALURU IN MFA.5418/1999 (LA
NO.240/2001) DATED 3.9.2001 VIDE ANNEX-A AND B.
W.P. No.12049/2017:
BETWEEN:
1. V NARAYANASWAMY
S/O ERAPPA,
DEAD BY HIS LR'S
1(a) SMT. PUTTAMMA
W/O V NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
OCC:NIL.
1(b) NANDAGOPAL
S/O V NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC:NIL.
1(c) N.BABU
S/O V NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
OCC:NIL.
ALL ARE R/O KAGGADASAPURA,
K.R.PURAM HOBLI
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU-93.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
- 11 -
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA AND GOA CIRCLE,
K.KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 042
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V.TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGMENT & AWARD PASSED
BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH COMMITTEE,
BENGALURU IN M.F.A.5343/1999 (LA No.210/2001)
DATED 27.8.2001 VIDE ANNEX-A AND B.
W.P. No.12050/2017:
BETWEEN
1. P PRAKASH
S/O K.PAPAIAH REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.
2. P. SRINIVAS
S/O K.PAPAIAH REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
3. P RAJASHEKAR
S/O P.PAPAIAH REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
OCC: NIL .
- 12 -
ALL ARE R/AT KAGGADASAPURA
K.R.PURA HOBLI
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 093.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE
K.KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 042
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V.TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH
COMMITTEE BENGALURU IN MFA No.5413/99
[LA.NO.239/2001] DTD.27.8.2001 VIDE ANNEXS-A AND B.
- 13 -
W.P. No.12488/2017:
BETWEEN
1. TAYAPPA REDDY
S/O MUNISHAMAPPA,
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR.S
1(a) SMT. NANJAMMA
W/O TAYAPPA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS.
OCC: NIL.
1(b) T. MUNIRAJU
S/O TAYAPPA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
1(c) T. SRINIVASA
S/O TAYAPPA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
1(d) K. T. RAMACHANDRA
S/O TAYAPPA REDDY,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
OCC: NIL.
ALLL ARE R/O KAGGADASAPURA
K.R.PURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK
BENGALURU - 560 093.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
- 14 -
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE
K.KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 042
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V.TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.ANUPAMA HEGDE, CGC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGEMENT & AWARD PASSED
BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH COMMITTEE,
BENGALURU IN M.F.A. No.5402/1999 (L.A.NO.512/2001)
DT.27.8.2001 VIDE ANNX-A & B.
W.P. No. 12489/2017:
BETWEEN:
SMT. RATNAMMA
W/O R MUNI REDDY,
SINCE DEAD BY LR'S.
R.MUNI REDDY
S/O N RAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
OCC:NIL, R/O KAGGADASAPURA,
K.R.PURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK,
BENGALURU-560 093.
- 15 -
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE
K.KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 042
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V.TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH
COMMITTEE, BENGALURU IN M.F.A.No.5408/1999
(LA.NO.214/2001) DTD.3.9.2001 VIDE ANNEXS-A AND B.
W.P.No.12965/2017:
BETWEEN:
1. CHIKKASIDDAPPA @ CHIKKASIDDAREDDY
SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR'S.
1(a) SMT.PAPAMMA
- 16 -
W/O CHIKKASIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS,
OCC:NIL.
1(b) SHAMANNA REDDY
S/O CHIKKASIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS,
OCC:NIL.
1(c) C S GOPALREDDY
S/O CHIKKASIDDAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
OCC:NIL.
ALL ARE R/O KAGGADASAPURA,
K.R.PURA HOBLI,
BENGALURU EAST TALUK,
BENGALURU-560 093.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI JAYAKUMAR S PATIL, SENIOR COUNSEL A/W
SRI LOKESH MALAVALLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICE
KARNATAKA & GOA CIRCLE
K.KAMARAJ ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 042
BY ITS DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER.
2. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
V.V.TOWER, 3RD FLOOR,
AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M N KUMAR, CGSC FOR R1
SRI JEEVAN J NEERALGI, AGA FOR R2)
- 17 -
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT LOK-ADALATH
COMMITTEE, BENGALURU IN M.F.A.No.5386/1999 (LA
No.228/2001) DTD 27.08.2001 VIDE ANNX-A AND B.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP THIS DAY,
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR J, PASSED THE
FOLLOWING;
ORDER
In these batch of writ petitions the petitioners
have sought for setting aside the order and award
passed by the High Court Lok Adalath Committee,
Bengaluru dated 27.08.2001/03.09.2001/21.09.2001.
2. The facts leading to the filing of the present
writ petitions are, that second respondent has
acquired the lands of the petitioners and other
properties for public purpose and published the
Gazette Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short LA Act, 1894) invoking
- 18 -
emergency clause under Section 17 of the LA Act,
1894 vide notification bearing No. LAQ(2) SR-7/88-89
dated 16.07.1988 and final notification bearing No.
RD/71/AQB/89 dated 19.01.1989 vide Karnataka
Gazette dated 11.05.1989. Respondent No. 2 has
awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.1,30,000/-
per acre. Petitioners, dissatisfied with the award, have
filed the reference application under Section 18 of the
LA Act, 1894, claiming higher compensation of
Rs.10,00,000/- per acre. Respondent No. 2 referred
the matter under Section 18 of the LA Act, 1894 to
City Civil Court, Bengaluru for adjudication of the
reference applications. The Additional City Civil Court
(CCH-17) after detailed enquiry and considering the
documents and evidence on record fixed the
compensation at Rs.2,48,000/- per acre. Respondent
No. 1 - Defence Estate Officer preferred appeals
before this Court in M.F.A. Nos. 5397/1999,
- 19 -
5403/1999, 5409/19999, 5405/1999, 5412/1999,
5418/1999, 5343/1999, 5413/1999, 5402/1999,
5408/1999 and 5386/1999. The said appeals have
been referred to High Court Lok Adalat. The Lok
Adalat on the basis of the joint memo filed by the
appellants and the respondents, fixed the
compensation at Rs.2,22,000/- per acre as against
Rs.2,48,000/- per acre with a direction to deposit the
award amount within two months before the reference
Court. It is the contention of the petitioners that
inspite of such direction, the respondents have not
deposited the award amount as per the award passed
in the Lok Adalat within two months. The petitioners
have filed execution cases which are pending
consideration before the reference Court. It is the
contention of the petitioners that compromise was
done forcibly and though the petitioners were not
ready for compromise, it was done only on the
- 20 -
assurance that the amount will be deposited within
two months from the date of the order. But, the
respondents have not fully deposited the award
amount. That respondent No.1 was depositing the
award amount in installments and has not deposited
the award amount in time as per the award passed by
the Lok Adalat and therefore they have filed the
present writ petitions seeking to recall the
compromise recorded by the Lok Adalat on
27.08.2001. It is the contention of the petitioners that
High Court Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction to
compromise the matters where value of the property
in dispute exceeds Rs.10,00,000/-.
3. Heard Sri. Jayakumar S. Patil, learned Senior
Counsel along with Sri. Lokesh Malavalli for
petitioners, Sri. M.N. Kumar and Smt. Anupama
- 21 -
Hegde, learned Central Government Standing Counsel
for respondent No. 1.
4. It is the submission of the learned Senior
Counsel that the respondents have not deposited the
award amount along with statutory benefits and
calculations made by the respondents is not proper.
The respondents have made payments to persons who
filed applications under Section 28-A of the LA Act,
1894 on the basis of the award passed by the High
Court Lok Adalat with all statutory benefits and they
are not making payment to petitioners on the basis of
the same calculations paid to the persons who have
approached under Section 28-A of the LA Act, 1894.
contended that they have made proper calculations
and deposited amount as per their calculations. It is
- 22 -
his further submission that the petitioners,
consequently upon deposit of decretal amount before
the reference Court had again approached the Lok
Adalat stating that the calculations done by
respondent No. 1 was not agreed to by them and
requested the Lok Adalat for clarification. The Lok
Adalat by its order dated 06.05.2002 has passed the
order as under:
"As the matters are already disposed
of by settlement, if claimants are not
satisfied with the calculations or deposit it
is open to levy execution so that the
executing Court can pass appropriate
orders."
6. It is their further submission that petitioners
thereafter have filed execution petitions. It is their
further submission that respondent No. 1 challenged
the order passed by the executing Court in W.P. No.
- 23 -
4612/2004 and 4613/2004 before this Court and they
were allowed with a direction to the executing Court
for fresh disposal in accordance with law within a
period of two months. It is their further submission
that in similar acquisition cases respondent No. 1 had
filed W.P. Nos. 50679/2012, 10615/2013, 10617/2013
and 10619/2013 before this Court against the orders
passed by the executing Court and this Court while
allowing the writ petitions has held that the
respondents are not entitled for any interest on
solatium prior to 19.09.2001 relying upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Sunder Vs. Union of India reported in 2001 AIR
SCW 3691 and in the case of Gurpreet Singh Vs.
Union of India reported in (2006) 8 SCC 457. It is
their further submission that petitioners did not make
out any grounds for challenging the consent award
passed by the Lok Adalat and the same was passed
- 24 -
without any force, coercion or undue influence. The
petitioners after accepting the consent award passed
way back in the year 2001 had prosecuted the
execution petition before the executing Court and now
after lapse of nearly 15 years have challenged the
award passed by the Lok Adalat and therefore the
petitions are not maintainable on the ground of delay
and laches and the action of the petitioners is nothing
but abuse of process of law.
7. Even though the petitions have been filed
seeking setting aside of the award passed by the Lok
Adalat dated 27.08.2001, learned counsel for the
petitioners has not chosen to argue and make out any
grounds for setting aside the award. Instead he chose
to argue only regarding the manner of calculations of
the amount as per the award. What is the amount the
petitioners are entitled as per the award is to be
- 25 -
calculated by the executing Court. The petitioners
have not challenged any order passed by the
executing Court in the present writ petitions. The
execution cases filed by the petitioners are pending
before the reference Court. The petitioners are at
liberty to agitate regarding the mode and method of
proper calculation of the amount as per the award
passed by the Lok Adalat, as per the decisions of the
Apex Court and the order passed by this Court in W.P.
No. 10617/2013 (LA-RES) dated 04.09.2013.
8. The award passed by the Lok Adalat is sought
to be quashed on the ground that the petitioners have
been forced to enter into compromise. The
compromise came to be recorded before the Lok
Adalat during August/September, 2001. The present
petitions came to be filed in the year 2017. Till the
filing of the present writ petitions the petitioners have
not made the said allegation of forcing them to enter
- 26 -
into compromise in any of the proceedings either
before this Court or before the reference
Court/executing Court. It is only when a dispute arose
regarding the mode and method of calculations the
petitioners have approached this Court challenging the
award passed by the Lok Adalat on the ground that
there is force to enter into compromise. The said
attitude of the petitioners is not bonafide and it is an
after thought. When the petitioners have filed
execution cases seeking execution of the award
passed by the Lok Adalat they are estopped from
challenging the award passed by the Lok Adalat on the
ground that they were forced to enter into
compromise.
9. The award under challenge in the present
petitions has been passed in the year 2001 and the
present petitions are filed in the year 2017, i.e., after
passage of 16 long years. There is no explanation by
- 27 -
the petitioners for the delay in approaching this Court.
The claim of the petitioners is defeated by delay and
laches. It is trite law that if there is delay and laches
on the part of the petitioners, on the same ground the
writ Court can refuse to grant relief. The Apex Court in
the case of Eastern Coalfields Limited Vs. Dugal
Kumar, reported in 2008 (14) SCC 295 has
observed thus:
"24. ... ... It is well settled that under
Article 226 of the Constitution, the power
of a High Court to issue an appropriate
writ, order or direction is discretionary. One
of the grounds to refuse the relief by a writ
court is that the petitioner is guilty of delay
and laches. It is imperative, where the
petitioner invokes extraordinary remedy
under Article 226 of the Constitution, that
he should come to the court at the earliest
reasonably possible opportunity.
Inordinate delay in making the motion for a
writ is indeed an adequate ground for
- 28 -
refusing to exercise discretion in favour of
the applicant."
8. The petitioners have not made out any
grounds to set aside the award passed by the High
Court Lok Adalat Committee and hence, the following;
ORDER
Writ petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
LRS
