← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/27272/2014dismissed

Smt.Chandra Bage , Maha Lakshmi, v. The Land Acquisition Officer, Hmda, Tarnaka, Hyderbad.

2018-09-27C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy,Gudiseva Shyam Prasad3 pages

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD Between:

Smt.Chandra Bage @ Maha Lakshmi, W/o.Satyanarayana Aged 55 years, Hindu, R/o.10-5-816/9D/3, Indralakshmi Nagar, Tukaram Gate, Lalaguda, Secunderabad.

...

Petitioner And The Land Acquisition Officer, HMDA, Tarnaka, Hyderabad and three others.

...

Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. K.V.R.Prasad for Mr.M.Vijaya Kanth Counsel for the Respondents : G.P. for Land Acquisition for R1 Mr.G.Pavana Murthy for R2 to R4 The Court made the following:

CVNR,J & GSP, J Order: (Per the Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) The petitioner who claims to have right over the land which is subject matter of P.L.C.No.17 of 2011 on the file of Lok Adalat, L.B. Nagar, R.R. district (not impleaded as a party), filed this writ petition, challenging the Award passed by the Lok Adalat based on the settlement reached between respondent No.1 on one side and respondents No.2 to 4 on the other side. The petitioner not being a party to the P.L.C., as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4, can avail appropriate legal remedies for asserting her right over the property acquired by respondent No.1, under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1994. As the Lok Adalat Award does not bind the petitioner as she is not a party thereto, in the event of the petitioner claiming her right over the acquired land and asserting her right to claim compensation/other statutory benefits, the impugned Lok Adalat Award shall not come in her way.

2.

Subject to the observations made herein before, the writ petition is dismissed, without adjudicating on the right claimed by the petitioner, with liberty to her to avail appropriate legal remedies available to her under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1994. 3.

As a sequel to the dismissal of the writ petition, I.A.No.1 of 2014 (W.P.M.P.No.34144 of 2014) is disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) _____________________ (Gudiseva Shyam Prasad,J) Date: 27th September, 2018 msb

CVNR,J & GSP, J