Arjuna Sahu vs Special Land Acquisition
2023 Latest Caselaw 13986 Ori

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                              LAA No.32 of 2013

Arjuna Sahu                             .....                                Appellant
                                                           Mr. S. Pradhan, Advocate
                                        Vs.
Special Land Acquisition                .....                             Respondents
Officer, Nalco, Angul and
another
                                                            Mr. N. Panda, Advocate
                                                             (for Respondent No.2)

                    CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
                                               ORDER

08.11.2023 Order No. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

06.

2. Learned Counsel for the Parties are present.

3. It is stated at the Bar that though the present Appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 16.01.2013 passed in L.A. REF. No.188 of 2009, a separate Appeal was preferred by the present Respondent No.2 challenging the same Award, which was registered as LAA No.36 of 2013. The said Appeal was disposed of vide Order dated 24.11.2023. Hence, the present APPOEAL be disposed of in terms of the order passed in LAA No.36 of 2013. The record in LAA No.36 of 2013 being called for, it is ascertained that on 24.11.2023, the said Appeal was disposed of with the following observations.

" 24.11.2013. This matter is taken up on the National Lok Adalat.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Addl. Government Advocate.

This appeal has been filed by the appellant

challenging the judgment dated 16.1.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Angul in L.A. Ref. No.188 of 2009 enhancing the compensation amount.

Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Respondent No.1-Arjun Sahu died on 19.1.2009 and the impugned judgment was passed on 16.1.2013. He further submitted that as the impugned judgment has been passed against the dead person, the same is not sustainable in law.

Since the impugned judgment has been passed against the dead person the same is nullity. Accordingly, this Court while setting aside the impugned judgment dated 16.1.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Angul in L.A. Ref. No.188 of 2009 remits the matter to the court below for fresh disposal in accordance with law. The L.A.A. is accordingly disposed of.'' (Emphasis Supplied)

4. In view of the above, the present Appeal, being infructuous, stands disposed of.

padma (S.K. MISHRA) JUDGE

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: PADMA CHARAN DASH Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 12-Nov-2023 08:36:27