Orissa High Court
State Of Orissa vs Dukhabandhu Sahu on 2 January, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
LAA No.65 of 2008
State of Orissa .... Appellant
Mr. B. Panigrahi, ASC
-versus-
Dukhabandhu Sahu .... Respondent
CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA
ORDER
02.01.2024
Order No.
07. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. This Appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated
18.08.2007 passed in L.A. Ref. No.86 of 2006 vide which the Court
below held that the present Respondent is entitled to get the
compensation of Rs.40,000/- for the house, Rs.2,000/- for Gharabadi
land and Rs.15,000/- for the trees along with all statutory benefits in
terms of Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and Section 28 of the L.A. Act.
3. Since there is a delay of 120 days in presenting the Memorandum
of Appeal, vide order dated 16.07.2015 it was ordered to issue notice on
the question of limitation in Misc. Case No.309 of 2008 with a direction
to file the requisites by 21.07.2015. Pursuant to the said order,
notice being issued to the sole Respondent, the same has returned
unserved with a noting "not known". Hence, vide order dated
16.09.2015, it was directed to take fresh steps for issuance of notice to
the sole Respondent in his present correct address by R.P with AD
within a week from the said date. But the State-Appellant didn't comply
the said order.
4. Again vide order dated 11.12.2015 further two weeks' time was
granted to the State Appellant to take steps in terms of the order dated
16.09.2015. Still the State-Appellant did not take necessary steps in
terms of the previous orders passed by the coordinate Bench.
5. Long thereafter, when the matter got listed on 24.02.2023, this
Court directed to take necessary steps for issuance of notice to the sole-
Respondent by 10.03.2023 positively and it was ordered to list the matter
under the heading "For Orders" immediately after service of notice on
the sole-Respondent.
6. As per the Office Note, steps for issuance of notice to the sole-
Respondent on the question of limitation is yet to be taken.
7. Apart from that, on perusal of the impugned judgment, it is found
that the sufficient reason has been assigned by the Court below to
enhance the compensation amount as detailed above.
8. In view of the above, the appeal stands dismissed for non-
compliance of orders dated 16.09.2015, 11.12.2015, so also dated
24.02.2023.
9. Since the appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission, Registry
is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the court below so also
to the sole-Respondent to ensure compliance of the judgment dated
18.08.2007 passed in L.A. Ref. No.86 of 2006.
(S.K. MISHRA)
JUDGE
Banita
Signed by: BANITA PRIYADARSHINI PALEI
Reason: AUTHENTICATION
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK
Date: 03-Jan-2024 18:15:36
