The Ap Industrial Infra. Corp. ... vs M/S Fazal Auto Electrical Works, ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 1598 Tel

 THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
                                       AND
      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

              I.A.No.1 of 2017 (WAMP.No.3211 of 2017)
                                In/And
                   WRIT APPEAL No.1685 OF 2017

COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma)

       Learned counsel for the appellants is fair enough in

informing this Court that the controversy involved in the

present case stands concluded on account of the judgment

delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The

Andhra        Pradesh       Industrial      Infrastructure        Corporation

Limited and others vs. S.N. Raj Kumar and another (Civil

Appeal No.3020 of 2018 and batch, decided on 10.04.2018).

         The operative portion of the aforesaid judgment is

reproduced as under:-

       "21.       In view of the above, it is not necessary to deal with
       the argument as to whether doctrine of proportionality is
       applicable in the instant case or not.       It is to be borne in
       mind, as rightly held by the High Court, that the appellant-
       Corporation had withdrawn the action of cancellation of the
       plots.     Instead, it demanded 50% of the prevailing market
       value in lump sum towards the cost of the plots. There is no
       legal basis for such a demand, more so, after the registration
       of the sale deeds in favour of the respondents thereby

transferring the ownership in these plots in their favour.

22. As a result, all these appeals are dismissed with costs. "

In the light of the aforesaid, the present writ appeal

deserves to be dismissed. However, there is a delay of 1068

days in filing the present writ appeal. The day-to-day delay has

not been explained. Therefore, the question of allowing present

application for condonation of delay does not arise and the same

is accordingly dismissed.

As a result, the writ appeal stands dismissed on the

ground of delay as well as on merits.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ

_______________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J

29.03.2022 JSU