NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL  NO(S). 10946 OF 2018

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 28984/2018]

KETHU PENCHAL REDDY & ORS.                    APPELLANT(S)

                               VERSUS

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LA)   RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. In the nature of the order we propose to pass in

this matter, it is not necessary to issue notice to

the respondent, since in any case they will get a

chance before the High Court and since we are not

dealing with the matter otherwise on merits.

3. An attempt of the appellants for enhancement of

compensation was declined by the High Court only on

the ground of delay.  In identical circumstances and

pertaining to the very same acquisition, this Court,

in  Civil  Appeal  No.1045/2018,  has  passed  the

following judgment:-

“1. Leave granted.

2.  The  High  Court,  as  per  the  impugned

order, declined to consider the claim made

by  the  appellant(s)  for  enhancement  of

1

compensation on the ground of unexplained

delay in approaching the High Court.  In

cases  where  the  claim  is  made  for

enhancement,  this  Court  has  taken  a

consistent view that in case the claimants

are denied the statutory benefits for the

period  covered  by  delay,  a  lenient  view

should be taken while condoning the delay.

3. Having  regard  to  the  facts  and

circumstances of the case, we condone the

delay on the part of the appellant(s) in

approaching the High Court on the condition

that for the period of delay, they shall

not be entitled to any statutory benefits

in case any enhancement is granted by the

High Court on merits.

4. Since  we  are  bereft  of  other

particulars on merits, we remit the matter

to the High Court for consideration of the

claims made by the appellant(s) on merits.

The  parties  will  appear  before  the  High

Court on 01.11.2018.  We request the High

Court to consider the matter expeditiously

since the claim pertains to the acquisition

in the year 1990.”

4. We do not find any ground for taking a different

stand.  This appeal is also disposed of in terms of

the judgment, extracted above, with a further request

to the High Court to dispose of the appeal on merits,

expeditiously,  with  a  rider  that  for  the  entire

period of delay the claimants will not be entitled to

any statutory benefits in the event of enhancement.

2

5. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, is

disposed of.

6. There shall be no order as to costs.

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ HEMANT GUPTA ]  

NEW DELHI; NOVEMBER 13, 2018.

3