Sani Guravaiah & Ors. v. The learned Government Pleader for Land
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
Sri J. Harinarayana, I.A.S., Chief Secretary, Govt. of A.P., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others. C.C.No. 677 of 2007 Between: Sani Guravaiah and others. …Respondents …Petitioners Vs. Sri J. Harinarayana, I.A.S., Chief Secretary, Govt. of A.P., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others. C.C.No. 678 of 2007 …Respondents Between: Thummala Mallam Konda Reddy and others. …Petitioners Vs. Sri J. Harinarayana, I.A.S., Chief Secretary, Govt. of A.P., Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM C.C.Nos. 676; 677 & 678 of 2007 Dated: 22-03-2012 ORAL COMMON ORDER: These contempt cases allege disobedience of the interim orders of this Court directing deposit of the entirety of the compensation awarded in the proceedings under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) due and payable in accordance with the orders of the Reference Court (under the Act), in different original petitions together with benefits payable under provisions of the Act within the time stipulated. The principal amount and some portion of the interest liable under the provisions of the Act are stated to have been paid by the State to the petitioners. The dispute is with regard to the quantum of interest and that is why the contempt cases are filed. At the hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioners Sri P. Sridhar Reddy states that as the petitioners filed execution petitions for execution of the awards of the reference Court and a substantial amount towards principal and interest have been paid by the State, the petitioners do not wish to pursue the contempt cases and would seek payment of the total amounts due including the disputed amount of interest in the execution petitions preferred by them. The learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition; the learned Government Pleader for Irrigation and Command area Development and for General Administration are not averse for such disposal. Accordingly the contempt cases are closed preserving the liberty to the petitioners to pursue any subsisting disputes with the State, in the execution petitions preferred by them before the Court below. No costs. The rule issued in the contempt cases stand discharged. __________________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM Dated: 22-03-2012 Pvks/*
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 18.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 22 Mar 2012. The bench was GODA RAGHURAM, GODA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.