LAWS(KAR)-2017-7-301

B.P. BASAVAREDDY Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

Decided On July 28, 2017
B.P. Basavareddy Appellant
V/S
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are challenging the order passed by the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn), Challakere in LAC No.206/2002 dated 08.01.2008 whereunder reference made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 01.01.1992 has been rejected as barred by limitation.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of Sri B M Siddappa, learned Advocate appearing for revision petitioners and Smt. Geetha, learned HCGP appearing for first respondent. Respondents-2 and 3 are served and unrepresented. Since petitioners-1 to 3 are L.Rs. of deceased respondent No.2, memo has been filed to treat the petitioners 1 to 3 as legal heirs of deceased respondent No.2. Memo is placed on record and accordingly they are ordered to be treated as L.Rs. of respondent No.2. Perused the judgment in question.

(3.) It is the contention of Sri B.M. Siddappa, learned Advocate appearing for revision petitioners that when there is no fault committed by the petitioners and when they were under the bonafide impression that based on their representation dated 03.09.1991 reference would be made by Special Land Acquisition Officer and said reference having made by the Assistant Commissioner cum Land Acquisition Officer on 01.01.1992, no fault can be laid at the doors of revision petitioners for delay and when substantial justice is pitted against technicalities it has to yield to substantial justice and technicalities will have to take a back seat or recede to the background. As such, he contends that order passed by the reference Court be set aside and matter be remanded back to the reference Court for being adjudicated on merits. He would also submit that under similar circumstances in CRP No.215/2008 revision petition came to be allowed by setting aside the order and remitted the matter back to the trial Court.