The Special Deputy Collector v. Upadrasta Nageswara Rao

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT & HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. BALAYOGI L.A.A.S.No. 55 of 2014 JUDGMENT:- (ORAL) (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait) This appeal is listed before this Court on receipt of a letter dated 08.09.2017 from the District Judge, Srikakulam wherein it is stated as under:

" I am to state that the Advocate for 71 claimants in L.A.O.P.No. 50 of 2008 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Rajam represented that the claimants are ready to receive 80% of compensation per acre on the award passed in L.A.O.P.No. 50 of 2008 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Rajam and the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), Amadalavalasa represented that they are ready to pay 80% of compensation per acre as per award passed in L.A.O.P.No. 50 of 2008 on the file of Senior Civil Judge, Rajam and further represented that they are not pressing the appeal in L.A.A.S.(SR).No. 11008 of 2013 in L.A.A.S.No. 55 of 2014 on the file of the Hon'ble High Court as both parties ready to compromise in E.P.No. 25 / 2014 in L.A.O.P No. 50 of 2008 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Rajam before the National Lok Adalat i.e. on 09.09.2017 at Rajam."

The learned Government Pleader for Appeals appearing on behalf of the appellant, submits that he has no objection if the Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition), Amadalavalasa is ready to pay 80% of the compensation per acre as per the Award dated 22.04.2013 in L.A.O.P.No. 50 of 2008 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Rajam and he will not press the appeal and is ready to compromise the matter in

SKK,J & NBY,J LAAS_55_2014 E.P.No. 25 of 2014 in L.A.O.P.No. 50 of 2008 before the National Lok Adalat, at Rajam.

The learned counsel for the respondents has not disputed the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Appeals.

In view of the above, the learned Government Pleader for Appeals appearing on behalf of the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the appeal in view of the letter dated 08.09.2017 mentioned above.

Permission is accorded.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed as having been withdrawn. However, the Execution Court is directed to record compromise and pay compensation as agreed upon between the appellant - Special Deputy Collector and the respondents-claimants. No order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

_____________________ SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J 14.09.2017 _________________ N. BALAYOGI, J bcj