Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly writ petitions are dismissed as devoid of
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
- Constitution of India arts. 226, 227
- Limitation Act, 1963 s. 5
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Learned counsel appearing for respondent, has brought to the notice of the Court wherein the Division Bench of this Court in MFA No.103629/2015 and connected appeals disposed off on 22.08.2022 in which the respondent-State has approached this Court and this Court dismissed the appeals…
Judgment
(BY SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, AGA) AND: MUNIR S/O. AHAMAD GAIBUSAB MOMIN AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587313. (BY SRI. S.S. BETURMATH, ADVOCATE) SHIVAKUMAR HIREMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH …PETITIONERS …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITON IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4958 WP No. 114139 of 2019 C/W WP No. 114140 of 2019 BAGALKOT IN LAC.A.NO.8/2016 AND ISSUE ANY WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, IN THE NATURE OF A CERTIORARI AND THEREBY QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2017 PASSED BY THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, BAGALKOT IN LAC.A.NO.8/2016, VIDE ANNEXURE-E REJECTING THE IA FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. IN WP NO. 114140/2019: BETWEEN:
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001.
THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, JAMAKHANDI-587301.
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BAGALKOTE DISTRICT, BAGALKOTE-587101. (BY SRI. ASHOK T. KATTIMANI, AGA) AND: BASAPPA S/O. RANGAPPA RUGI AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOTE-587101. (BY SRI. S.S. BETURMANTH, ADVOCATE) …PETITIONERS …RESPONDENT THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE DESTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4958 WP No. 114139 of 2019 C/W WP No. 114140 of 2019 BAGALKOT IN LAC.A.NO.9/2016 AND ISSUE ANY WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION, IN THE NATURE OF A CERTIORARI AND THEREBY QUASH THE ORDER DATED 01.04.2017 PASSED BY THE FILE OF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, BAGALKOT IN LAC.A.NO.9/2016, VIDE ANNEXURE-E REJECTING THE IA FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND ALLOW THE APPLICATION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. These writ petitions are filed by the petitioners- State challenging the order dated 01.04.2017 in LACA No.8/2016 on the file of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkote (sitting at Jamakhandi), dismissing the application in I.A. No.1 filed by the applicants/petitioners herein under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
3. Having taken note of the factual aspect on record and taking into account the grounds urged in the Memorandum of petitions as well as the reasons stated by the applicants/petitioners herein to condone the delay in filing the applications and petitions before the Trial Court - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4958 WP No. 114139 of 2019 C/W WP No. 114140 of 2019 is rightly dismissed as same would not satisfy that the sufficient grounds has been made out in the application.
Operative part
Learned counsel appearing for respondent, has brought to the notice of the Court wherein the Division Bench of this Court in MFA No.103629/2015 and connected appeals disposed off on 22.08.2022 in which the respondent-State has approached this Court and this Court dismissed the appeals and as such confirmed the judgment and award dated 28.06.2014 in LAC No.4/2008, in which, one of the petitions connected with the relief claimed in these petitions. It is also well established principles of law that, while considering the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, it is not the length of delay but cause of delay, has to be looked into. In view of the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Nagaland Vs. Lipok AO and other reported in (2005) 3 SCC 752, it is held that sufficient grounds has to be made to satisfy the reasons for delay in approaching the Court. Therefore, the reasons for delay as stated by the applicants/petitioners do not - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:4958 WP No. 114139 of 2019 C/W WP No. 114140 of 2019 satisfy the ingredients of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Accordingly writ petitions are dismissed as devoid of merits. Sd/- JUDGE SMM LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 17
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly writ petitions are dismissed as devoid of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Constitution of India — arts. 226, 227; Limitation Act, 1963 — s. 5.
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.