IN THE HIGH COURT OF DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 27 T H DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. SATYANARAYANA

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101259/2014 (LAC)

BETWEEN

1. SMT. MAHADEVI W/O BASAPPA GUGGARI, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O , NOW AT KONNUR VILLAGE, TQ: , DIST: BAGALKOT.

2. SMT. REKAVVA W/O IRANNA KILLEDAR, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O GALAGALI, NOW AT KONNUR VILLAGE, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

3. NEELAMMA D/O BASAPPA GUGGARI, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O GALAGALI, NOW AT KONNUR VILLAGE, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

4. SAVITA D/O BASAPPA GUGGARI, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O GALAGALI, NOW AT KONNUR VILLAGE, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

5. MALLAPPA S/O BASAPPA GUGGARI, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O GALAGALI, NOW AT KONNUR VILLAGE, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT.

6. RAVI S/O BASAPPA GUGGARI, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O GALAGALI, NOW AT KONNUR VILLAGE, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2

7. KIRAN S/O BASAPPA GUGGARI, AGE: YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O GALAGALI, NOW AT KONNUR VILLAGE, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT. ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI B.M. ANGADI AND SMT RATNAMALA G.H., ADVOCATES.)

AND

1. THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, JAMAKHANDI.

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER MINOR IRRIGATION, . ... RESPONDENTS

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 54(1) OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:21.12.2013, PASSED IN LAC.NO.25/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JAMKHANDI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE REFERENCE PETITION FOR COMPENSATION & SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION, ETC.,.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS REGARDING NON COMPLIANCE OF OFFICE OBJECTIONS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed on 29.4.2014 with as many as

7 defects. Though initially statutory period of six weeks time was granted for removal of office objections, objections were not removed. Hence this appeal was 3

listed before the Court on 14.10.2014, 28.10.2014 and on 11.11.2014. On all these dates though sufficient time was granted, office objections were not removed.

Today when the matter was called out at 10.30 a.m., there was no representation for the appellant, so also again in the afternoon at 4.40 p.m., when it was called out for second time. Hence this Court find no justifiable grounds to grant further time. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed for non compliance of office objections.

SD/- JUDGE

Mrk/-