GIRIMALLAPPA versus THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER M & MIP & ANR

GIRIMALLAPPA versus THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER M & MIP & ANR

Petitioner did not belong to the class protected by Section 28-A, and made no specific demand for enhancement before the High Court. Mere reference to higher award for similar land without demonstrating similarity is insufficient. High Court did not prefer technicalities over justice; petitioner’s claim stood satisfied. SLP lacked merit and was dismissed.

Parties
Petitioner: Girimallappa; Respondent: Special Land Acquisition Officer M & MIP; Respondent: Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) / Final Order on SLP
Outcome
SLP dismissed
Legal Topics
Re Determination of Compensation, Section 28 a, Delay/laches, Court Fees, Enhancement of Compensation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Girimallappa

Petitioner

Special Land Acquisition Officer M & MIP

Respondent

Anr.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) / Final Order on SLP

  1. 1 Eligibility for re-determination of compensation under Section 28-A
  2. 2 Requirement to specify enhanced compensation demand
  3. 3 Application of Section 28-A to affluent petitioners

Ratio Decidendi

Petitioner did not belong to the class protected by Section 28-A, and made no specific demand for enhancement before the High Court. Mere reference to higher award for similar land without demonstrating similarity is insufficient. High Court did not prefer technicalities over justice; petitioner’s claim stood satisfied. SLP lacked merit and was dismissed.

Court Disposition

SLP dismissed

Orders

  • Delay condoned
  • Petition dismissed as lacking merit