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

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Nanakchand Pyarmal & Ors [1995] INSC 756 (28 November 1995)

K. Ramaswamy, S.B. Majmudar




Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published on February 4, 1970 acquiring a large extent of land. The Collector made the award and paid compensation which was accepted by the respondents without protest. It would appear that one of the claimants covered under the same notification sought reference under Section 18 and the District Judge, Raigarh at Alibag in Reference No. 183/86 enhanced the compensation to Rs.10/- per square meter by his award and decree dated November 6, 1987. Against the said award and decree, the State carried First Appeal No.1038/88 which was admitted on February 16, 1989 and ad interim stay of the award and decree of the District Court was granted subject to certain conditions.

The respondents thereon filed an application under Section 28A (1) on February 2, 1988 for redetermination of the amount of compensation to their lands on the basis of the said award of the District Judge. It would appear from the record that the Collector made a draft award and referred the matter to the State Government for approval. At that stage the respondents filed a writ petition in the High Court. A Division Bench of the High Court by the impugned order dated August 24, 1992 directed the Land Acquisition Officer to declare the award by the end of November 1992.

Thus this appeal by special leave.

In view of the fact that the award of the Reference Court, referred to hereinbefore, is already the subject matter of the appeal pending decision in the High Court, appropriate course would be to keep the reference application made under Section 28A (1) pending till disposal of the appeal in the High Court. The Collector shall take action only on the basis of the judgment that may be rendered by the High Court. Until then, the matter be kept pending. The writ petition stands dismissed subject to the above direction.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No costs.



Pages: 1 2 

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