CUTTACK, India, Feb. 19 -- Orissa High Court issued the following order on Jan. 19:

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 19th December, 2024 (Annexure-6) passed by learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Rairakhol in CMA No.01 of 2021 and also prays for a direction to learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rairakhol to restore L.A. Case No. 89 of 1993 to file.

3. Mr. Debata, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the land of the father of the Petitioner, namely, Bhagabata Pradhan was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act') for Talcher-Sambalpur Rail Link project. The Special Land Acquisition Officer of the project passed an award under Section 11 of the Act awarding a meager amount of compensation in favour of the father of the Petitioner. Being aggrieved, the father of the Petitioner filed an application for enhancement of compensation before the Special Land Acquisition Officer and the matter was referred to the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Sambalpur and was registered as LA Case No.89 of 1993 under Section 18 of the Act. When the matter was pending before learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Sambalpur, the father of the Petitioner, namely, Bhagabata Pradhan died in the year, 1994 and the Special Land Acquisition Officer was directed to take steps for substitution of said Bhagabata Pradhan. But no step for substitution was taken. However, the reference was taken up for consideration on 19th August, 2009 and learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), holding that steps for substitution of the deceased father of the Petitioner was not taken and the case was of the year 1993, confirmed the award. He further directed that the amount awarded under Section 11 of the Act be disbursed in favour of the LRs of said Bhagabata Pradhan. The Petitioner, who is the son of the land looser, could not know about the proceeding of the reference, as no notice whatsoever was served on him at any stage of the proceeding. When the matter stood thus, getting information from a co-villager, the Petitioner tried to contact the counsel of his father, but came to know that learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner had expired since 21st January, 2019. Thereafter, the Petitioner applied for certified copy of the proceeding on 26th February, 2021 engaging another counsel. On receiving the certified copy of the order, the Petitioner filed CMA No.01 of 2021 under Section 151 of CPC to recall order dated 19th August, 2009 passed in LA Case No.89 of 1993 along with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay. By that time the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rairakhol had already been created. As the acquired land was situated within the local limits of the said Court at Rairakhol, the aforesaid applications were filed there. The application for condonation of delay was dismissed vide order dated 19th December, 2024 (Annexure-6). Consequently, the CMA was also dismissed. Assailing the said order, this writ petition has been filed with a further prayer to restore the reference to file.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x0MR1dA3oNTTrW%2F5uB%2F7RE5ZsNgoRDtlRd%2FRj6X53Jp7&caseno=WP(C)/17286/2025&cCode=1&cino=ODHC010354442025&state_code=11&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.