Karnataka High Court
Gudusab Since Deceased By Lrs vs The Spl. Land Acquisition Officer And ... on 3 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:58
MSA No. 200068 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
MISCL SECOND APPEAL NO. 200068 OF 2021 (LA)
BETWEEN:
GUDUSAB
SINCE DECEASED BY LRS.
FAKIR SAB w/o LATE GUDUSAB,
AGE : 42 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. KAMALAPUR VILLAGE,
TQ. & DIST. KALABURAGI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S.S. SAJJANSHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by SOMANATH
1. THE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,
PENTAPPA
MITTE M AND MIP, MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF KALABURAGI-585101.
KARNATAKA
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,
KALABURAGI-585101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G.B.YADAV, HCGP)
THIS MSA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(2) OF THE LAND
ACQUISITION ACT, 1894, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.09.2010 PASSED BY THE
PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-I, AT GULBARGA IN
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:58
MSA No. 200068 of 2021
LAC APPEAL NO.3/2008 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND PLEASED TO
MODIFY BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL BY ENHANCING THE
COMPENSATION AT RS.1,66,000/- PER ACRE FOR DRY LAND
FROM RS.39,060/- PER ACRE AS AWARDED BY THE LOWER
APPELLATE COURT, WITH ALL STATUTORY BENEFITS,
INTEREST AND WITH COST.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant and Sri Gopalkrishna B.Yadav, learned High
Court Government Pleader appearing for respondents/
State.
2. This appeal is filed by the appellant challenging
the judgment and award dated 23.09.2010 in LAC Appeal
No.3/2008 on the file of Fast Track Court-I at Gulbarga.
3. Since there is delay of 3371 days in filing the
appeal, the appellant has filed I.A.No.1/2023 seeking
condonation of delay. In this regard, as there is inordinate
delay of nearly 10 years in filing the appeal, I have
carefully considered the reasons assigned by the appellant
in the affidavit accompanying the application in
NC: 2024:KHC-K:58
I.A.No.1/2023. The relevant para to be considered is
paragraph no.5 of the affidavit where the appellant has
stated that due to COVID-2019 Pandemic and as the
appellant has to meet the family debts, the appellant was
not able to approach the counsel for filing the appeal
seeking enhancement of compensation.
4. Having taken note of the factual aspect, as the
appellant herein has not shown sufficient cause that could
be acceptable to condone the delay of nearly 10 years and
each day in filing the appeal has to be narrated with
cogent reasons, I am of the view that the application in
I.A.No.1/2023 is liable to be dismissed.
5. It is well established principles of law that it is
not the length of the delay but delay has to be condoned,
if the reasons offered by the appellant are satisfying the
parameters under which the condonation of delay has to
be made and taking into account the reasons stated at
paragraph no.5 of the affidavit, the appellant has
approached this Court belatedly and there is inordinate
NC: 2024:KHC-K:58
delay of nearly 10 years in filing the appeal. In that view
of the matter, I am of the opinion that I.A.No.1/2023 is
liable to be dismissed, accordingly dismissed.
Consequently appeal fails.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
