Legal Provisions Involved: Section 74 and Section 103 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013; Sections 5 and 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Judgement By: Supreme Court of India.

Judge/Bench: Justice Satish Chandra Sharma.

Facts

Several appeals were filed by State authorities against land acquisition compensation awards. These appeals were filed late. The High Courts dismissed them, saying that the delay could not be excused because Section 74 of the 2013 Act gives a fixed time limit for filing appeals. The States then approached the Supreme Court.

Key Legal Provisions

Section 74 and Section 103 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 

Sections 5 and 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Issues Raised

Can courts condone delay in appeals filed under Section 74 of the 2013 Act by applying Section 5 of the Limitation Act?

Arguments of the Case

The States argued that since the 2013 Act does not clearly bar the Limitation Act, delay should be condoned. The opposite side argued that Section 74 is a complete law and leaves no scope for extension.

Judgement

The Supreme Court held that delay can be condoned. It said the 2013 Act is a welfare law and does not exclude the Limitation Act. The appeals were restored for fresh hearing.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.