Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Supreme Court Judgments

Latest Supreme Court of India Judgments 2021


RSS Feed img

State of Haryana Vs. Shanti Parshad Jain & Ors [1995] INSC 275 (10 May 1995)

Manohar Sujata V. (J) Manohar Sujata V. (J) Verma, Jagdish Saran (J) Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J.

CITATION: 1995 SCC (4) 532 1995 SCALE (3)607



THE 10TH DAY OF MAY, 1995 Present:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.S. Verma Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sujata V. Manohar Mr. Maninder Singh and Ms. Indu Malhotra, Advs. for the appellant. Mr. Prem Malhotra, Adv. for the Respondents.

The following Judgement of the Court was delivered:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5654-55 OF 1995 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 12914-14A of 1989) State of Haryana Appellant V. Shanti Parshad Jain & Ors. .....Respondents

Delay condoned.

Special leave granted.

These appeals pertain to the land pertaining to the respondents which has been acquired pursuant to Notification dated 30.1.1973 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Notification dated 24.7.1973 under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894. The land has been acquired by the appellant for the public purpose of development and utilisation of land in the urban estate to be set up in the area of village Hissar.

The Land Acquisition Collector by his award dated 5.9.1973 awarded compensation to the respondents for `A' Category of land at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre and for `B' Category at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per acre.

Aggrieved by this award, the respondents preferred a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the Additional District Judge, Hissar. By his order dated 23.1.1979, the Additional District Judge enhanced the award amount as set out therein. In an appeal from this order, the High court by its order dated 9.12.1988 further enhanced the compensation amount and also granted the benefit of Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the amended Land Acquisition Act to the respondents.

The only point urged before us by the appellant is in respect of the benefit granted under Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act to the respondents.

In this case both the award of the Collector as well as the award by the court under a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act have been made prior to 30th of April, 1982. Hence the benefit of Section 23(1A) cannot be extended to the respondents. (See: K.S.Paripoornan v. State of Kerala & Ors. (1994 (5) SCC 593).

The benefit of Sections 23(2) as well as 28 also is not available to the respondents in the present case because neither the award of the Collector nor the award by the Court is after 30.4.1982 and before 24.9.1984. Unless the appeal before the High Court or before us is in respect of the award made by the Collector or the Court between 30.4.1982 and 24.9.1984 the benefit of the amended Sections 23(2) and 28 cannot be granted in such appeals. (See: Union of India & Anr. v. Raghubir Singh (dead) by Lrs. etc. (1989 (3) SCR 316).

The appeals are accordingly allowed and the order of the High Court insofar as it grants the benefit of amended Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 to the respondents, is set aside. In the circumstances of the case, however, there will be no order as to costs.



Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys