Case Note & Summary
The case involves a review petition filed by the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) and its Special Land Acquisition Officer against an order dated 02.01.2012 in W.P.No.24994/2011. The writ petition had been allowed, quashing an endorsement dated 22.09.2010 and directing reconsideration of the respondent's application for allotment of sites under an incentive scheme. The review petition was filed on 02.04.2013, resulting in a delay of 416 days. The petitioners filed I.A.No.2/2013 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay. The respondent opposed the application. The court examined whether sufficient cause was shown for the delay. The background involves a preliminary notification dated 01.04.1981 for acquisition of land, a final declaration on 31.03.1984, and an award on 25.04.1987. The respondent, owner of acquired land, applied for allotment under an incentive scheme, which was rejected. The writ petition was allowed without objections from MUDA. The court found that the delay was not properly explained and dismissed the review petition as barred by limitation.
Headnote
A) Limitation Act - Condonation of Delay - Section 5 - Sufficient Cause - Petitioners filed review petition with 416 days delay - Delay not properly explained - No sufficient cause shown - Held that delay cannot be condoned (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners have shown sufficient cause to condone the delay of 416 days in filing the review petition.
Final Decision
Review petition dismissed as barred by limitation. I.A.No.2/2013 for condonation of delay rejected.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay
- Sufficient cause
- Limitation Act
- Section 5
- Review petition
- Delay of 416 days
- Land acquisition
- Incentive scheme
Case Details
2015 LawText (KAR) (04) 120
Review Petition No.166/2013 in Writ Petition No.24994/2011 (LA-UDA)
Sri T.P. Vivekananda, Sri P.S. Manjunath (for petitioners); Sri Manmohan P.N. (for R1); Smt. Anitha R., HCGP (for R2)
Mysore Urban Development Authority and Special Land Acquisition Officer
Honne Gowda and State of Karnataka
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Review petition against order in writ petition concerning land acquisition and allotment of sites under incentive scheme.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought review of order dated 02.01.2012 in W.P.No.24994/2011 and condonation of delay of 416 days.
Filing Reason
Petitioners filed review petition due to alleged error in the order allowing the writ petition.
Previous Decisions
W.P.No.24994/2011 was allowed on 02.01.2012, quashing endorsement dated 22.09.2010 and directing reconsideration of application.
Issues
Whether the petitioners have shown sufficient cause to condone the delay of 416 days in filing the review petition.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners sought condonation of delay under Section 5 of Limitation Act.
Respondent opposed the application for condonation of delay.
Ratio Decidendi
The petitioners failed to show sufficient cause for the delay of 416 days in filing the review petition. Hence, the delay cannot be condoned and the review petition is dismissed as barred by limitation.
Judgment Excerpts
Thus, there is delay of 416 days in filing this petition.
Since I.A.No.2 was opposed by filing of statement of objections, the first question is, whether the petitioners have shown sufficient cause to condone the delay.
Procedural History
Preliminary notification dated 01.04.1981 for land acquisition. Final declaration on 31.03.1984. Award on 25.04.1987. Respondent applied for allotment under incentive scheme; endorsement dated 22.09.2010 rejected request. W.P.No.24994/2011 filed and allowed on 02.01.2012. Review petition filed on 02.04.2013 with delay of 416 days. I.A.No.2/2013 filed for condonation of delay.
Acts & Sections
- Limitation Act, 1963: Section 5
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC): Order 47 Rule 1
