Union of India Vs. Shamsher and anr. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1171868
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided OnNov-10-2014
JudgeSUNIL GAUR
AppellantUnion of India
RespondentShamsher and anr.
Excerpt:
* in the high court of delhi at new delhi date of decision:10. h november, 2014 + la.app. 177/2013 union of india ..... appellant through: mr. siddharth panda & mr. priyabrat sahu, advocates versus shamsher & anr. through: ..... respondents nemo. coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur judgment (oral) c.m. no.14019/2013 (u/o xxxxi rule 3a r/w sec. 151 cpc & sec. 5 of the limitation act) the stand taken in paragraph no.3 of the instant application discloses bureaucratic lethargy, which has caused delay of 157 days’ in filing the accompanying appeal. applying the parameters governing condonation of delay, as reiterated by the apex court in esha bhattacharjee vs. raghunathpur nafar academy (2013) 12 scc649to the instant case, i find that delay occasioned has not been satisfactorily explained. hence, this application is dismissed. la.app. 177/2013 & c.m.no.14018/2013 (for stay) impugned judgment grants compensation for ‘c’ category of land la.app.no.177/2013 page 1 @ `18,47,539.68/- per acre with consequential benefits to respondents in respect of their land situated in village rajapur kalan, delhi, which was acquired vide notification of 27th january, 2003, under section 4 of the land acquisition act, 1894. since appellant’s application seeking condonation of delay stands dismissed, therefore, this appeal is dismissed as time barred. even on merits, impugned order suffers from no infirmity or illegality, as it grants compensation at par with compensation granted to similarly situated persons in la.app no.266/2008, jai singh vs. union of india & anr., decided by a coordinate bench of this court on 23rd august, 2011. application for stay is dismissed as infructuous. (sunil gaur) judge november10 2014 r la.app.no.177/2013 page 2
Judgment:

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision:

10. h November, 2014 + LA.APP. 177/2013 UNION OF INDIA ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Siddharth Panda & Mr. Priyabrat Sahu, Advocates versus SHAMSHER & ANR. Through: ..... Respondents Nemo. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT

(Oral) C.M. No.14019/2013 (u/O XXXXI Rule 3A r/w Sec. 151 CPC & Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act) The stand taken in paragraph No.3 of the instant application discloses bureaucratic lethargy, which has caused delay of 157 days’ in filing the accompanying appeal. Applying the parameters governing condonation of delay, as reiterated by the Apex Court in Esha Bhattacharjee Vs. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC649to the instant case, I find that delay occasioned has not been satisfactorily explained. Hence, this application is dismissed. LA.APP. 177/2013 & C.M.No.14018/2013 (for stay) Impugned judgment grants compensation for ‘C’ category of land LA.APP.No.177/2013 Page 1 @ `18,47,539.68/- per acre with consequential benefits to respondents in respect of their land situated in village Rajapur Kalan, Delhi, which was acquired vide Notification of 27th January, 2003, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Since appellant’s application seeking condonation of delay stands dismissed, therefore, this appeal is dismissed as time barred. Even on merits, impugned order suffers from no infirmity or illegality, as it grants compensation at par with compensation granted to similarly situated persons in LA.APP No.266/2008, Jai Singh Vs. Union of India & Anr., decided by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 23rd August, 2011. Application for stay is dismissed as infructuous. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE NOVEMBER10 2014 r LA.APP.No.177/2013 Page 2