Ananta Charan Sahoo vs Land Acquisition Officer And Others

Arindam Sinha, J

Mr. Mishra, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant and submits, the appeal is preferred against judgment dated 14th December, 2017 made under section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. He submits, petitioner having been aggrieved by the award had approached the District Judge under section 34. The learned Judge did not fully appreciate contentions of appellant and therefore the appeal. Mr. Pattnaik, learned advocate appears on behalf of respondents and submits, his clients had also filed appeal against impugned judgment because the learned Judge dealt with the challenge as if it was an appeal. He submits, the Court adjudicating a challenge under section 34 does not have powers of appellate Court.

It transpires that respondents' appeal ARBA no.18 of 2018 stood dismissed by operation of order dated 13th July, 2018. By said order defects were directed to be removed within a week, failing which the appeal would be dismissed without further reference to the Bench.

In facts and circumstances above, Court made observations and queries of parties. Respondents are to issue instruction regarding whether they will forbear from taking steps to restore its appeal. This direction because appellant has assured Court that on such consideration, appellant will not press this appeal. Adjournment is granted for parties to obtain instructions and submit.

List on 1st December, 2021.

..........................