Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Balkrishna Kana Naik, filed a contempt petition alleging that the respondent, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, failed to comply with the directions issued by the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 5595 of 1997. The court had directed the respondent to decide the petitioner's application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within six months from 24.11.1997. The petitioner claimed that despite this direction and an undertaking given in a previous contempt petition (No. 227 of 1998) to pass the award and make payment by 30.10.1998, the respondent did not comply. However, during the hearing, the learned A.G.P. placed on record a letter dated 1.1.1999 from the respondent showing that the application was decided and enhanced compensation of Rs. 41,531/- was paid to the petitioner on 23.11.1998, with a receipt acknowledged by the petitioner. The court took the documents on record and, noting that the directions had been complied with, dismissed the contempt petition.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Compliance with Directions - Section 28-A Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The petitioner alleged that the respondent failed to decide his application under Section 28-A within six months as directed by the court, and also breached an undertaking given in a previous contempt petition. The court held that since the enhanced compensation was paid to the petitioner on 23.11.1998, the directions were complied with, and the contempt petition was dismissed. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent committed contempt of court by failing to comply with the court's direction to decide the petitioner's application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within six months, and whether the subsequent payment of enhanced compensation purged the contempt.
Final Decision
The contempt petition is dismissed as the directions issued by the court have been complied with and the enhanced compensation amount has been paid to the petitioner.
Law Points
- Contempt of court
- compliance with court orders
- undertaking
- Land Acquisition Act
- Section 28-A
- enhanced compensation
- dismissal of contempt petition
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (02) 187
Contempt Petition No. 314 of 1998 in Contempt Petition No. 227 of 1998 in Writ Petition No. 5595 of 1997
None for the Petitioner, Mr. A.H. Palekar (A.G.P.) for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
The State of Maharashtra, Mr. Rajagiri Babugiri Gosawi (Special Land Acquisition Officer)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Contempt petition alleging non-compliance with court directions and breach of undertaking.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought action for contempt against the respondent for failing to decide his application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within the stipulated time and for not honoring the undertaking given to the court.
Filing Reason
The respondent did not decide the petitioner's application under Section 28-A within six months as directed by the court in Writ Petition No. 5595 of 1997, and also failed to comply with an undertaking to pass the award and make payment by 30.10.1998.
Previous Decisions
Writ Petition No. 5595 of 1997 was decided on 24.11.1997 directing the respondent to decide the petitioner's application under Section 28-A within six months. Contempt Petition No. 227 of 1998 was filed earlier, in which the respondent gave an undertaking to pass the award and make payment by 30.10.1998.
Issues
Whether the respondent committed contempt by failing to decide the petitioner's application under Section 28-A within six months as directed.
Whether the respondent breached the undertaking given in Contempt Petition No. 227 of 1998.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner alleged that the respondent did not decide the application within six months and did not comply with the undertaking.
The respondent, through the A.G.P., placed on record a letter showing that the application was decided and enhanced compensation of Rs. 41,531/- was paid to the petitioner on 23.11.1998, with a receipt acknowledged by the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi
Once the court's directions are complied with and the enhanced compensation is paid, the contempt petition becomes infructuous and is liable to be dismissed.
Judgment Excerpts
The Special Land Acquisition Officer Metro Centre No.3 Panvel, is directed to decide and dispose of the petitioner’s application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within six months from today.
As per the said letter, the petitioner’s application filed under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act was decided and enhanced compensation amount of Rs.41,531/- was paid to him on 23.11.1998.
Procedural History
Writ Petition No. 5595 of 1997 was decided on 24.11.1997 directing the respondent to decide the petitioner's application under Section 28-A within six months. The petitioner filed Contempt Petition No. 227 of 1998, in which the respondent gave an undertaking to pass the award and make payment by 30.10.1998. As the undertaking was not complied with, the petitioner filed the present Contempt Petition No. 314 of 1998 on 3.11.1998. During the hearing, the respondent showed that the application was decided and payment was made on 23.11.1998.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 28-A
