Orissa High Court
Jyotirmayee Patnaik & vs Union Of India & Others on 18 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
L.A.A No.78 of 2017
Jyotirmayee Patnaik & .... Appellants
others
Mr. S.R. Singhsamant,
Advocate
-versus-
Union of India & others .... Respondents
Ms. B. Sahoo,
Central Government Counsel
Mr. G. Rout,
Additional Standing Counsel
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
Order No.
18.01.2023
I.A. No.244 of 2022
09. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. This is an application filed by the Appellants to admit the
document i.e. Judgment dated 13.10.2017 passed by the
learned Senior Civil Judge, Nayagarh, in L.A. Misc. Case No.91
of 2007 as additional evidence and mark the same as Exhibit-4.
3. Though Ms. B. Sahoo, learned Central Government
Counsel took time on 06.01.2023 to file objection to the I.A., till
date no written objection has been filed on behalf of the Union of
India, so also by the State-Respondent Nos.2 & 3.
4. However, the learned Central Government Counsel
appearing for the Union of India, so also learned Counsel for the
State vehemently opposes to the prayer made in the I.A. on the
ground that since the I.A. has been filed under Order-41, Rule-
27(aa) of C.P.C., as admittedly the Judgment in L.A. Misc. Case
No.91 of 2007 was pronounced on 13.10.2017 i.e. after
pronouncement of the impugned Judgment dated 10.07.2017 in
L.A.A. No.78 of 2017, the said provision of law will not be
applicable for accepting the said document as additional
evidence.
5. Mr. Singhsamant, learned Counsel for the Appellants
submits that by mistake, there is an indication regarding the
said provision though this Court requires the said document to
enable it to adjudicate the Appeal and pronounce the Judgment
for enhancement of the compensation amount, as prayed for. To
substantiate his submission, learned Counsel for the Appellants
submits that the Trace Map of the said locality though was
exhibited as Exhibit-2 before the learned court below which
clearly demonstrates that Plot No.38 of Kissam Taila-II of
Mouza-Bhiruda, PS: Nuagaon, District: Nayagarh is at a more
distance from the National Highway No.57 whereas, the Plots in
question, so far as it relates to L.A. Misc. Case No.90 of 2007,
are adjacent to the National Highway. But the learned Court
below awarded Rs.1,500/- per decimal as compensation amount
in L.A. Misc. Case No.90 of 2007 whereas, in L.A. Misc. Case
No.91 of 2007, awarded Rs.9,000/- per decimal towards
compensation amount pertaining to Plot No.38 (supra). He
further submits that the Judgment passed in L.A. Misc. Case
No.91 of 2007 has already been implemented and the
compensation has been paid to the claimant/petitioner and the
appellants may be permitted to demonstrate the certified copy of
the Judgment in L.A. Misc. Case No.91 of 2007 which will
enable this Court to pronounce the Judgment on merit, so also
to do justice to the Appellant. Further, to substantiate his
submission, Mr. Singhsamant produces the photo copy of the
said Trace Map which was exhibited before the Court below as
Exhibit-2 along with the photo copy of the letter dated
28.05.2021 of the Public Information Officer, Office of the Land
Acquisition Zone Officer, Khurda Road Bolangir New B.G. Rail
Link Project, Nayagarh to demonstrate that Plot No.38 under
Khata No.157/10 is 100 meters away from National Highway
No.57 whereas, the plots of the present appellants acquired by
the authority are on lesser distance from National Highway
No.57, which be kept on record.
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel
for the Appellants, this Court is inclined to accept the said
document i.e. certified copy of the Judgment dated 13.10.2017
passed in L.A. Misc. Case No.91 of 2007 as additional evidence
to be examined at the time of final hearing of the Appeal as to
the relevance of the said judgment for adjudication of the
present Appeal on merit.
7. Accordingly, the I.A. stands disposed of.
(S. K. MISHRA)
JUDGE
L.A.A. No.78 of 2017
10. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Admit.
3. Since Ms. B. Sahoo, learned Central Government Counsel
accepts notice on behalf of Opposite Party No.1, so also Mr. G.N.
Rout, learned Additional Standing Counsel accepts notice on
behalf Respondent Nos.2 & 3, copies of the Memorandum of
Appeal be served on them by 20th January, 2023.
4. L.C.R. be called for urgently.
5. Since this appeal is of the year 2007, matter be listed
immediately after receipt of L.C.R. under the heading "Hearing".
(S. K. MISHRA)
Prasant
JUDGE
