LexPREM CHAND & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2010] 3 S.C.R. 1128 A PREM CHAND & ORS. B v. UNION OF INDIA (Civil Appeal No. 2856 of 2010) MARCH 30, 2010 [V.S. SIRPURKAR AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.] Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - ss. 4 and 23(1A) r/w. s. 30(1)(b) - Land acquired - Cf::iim for compensation - High c Court relying on its previous judgment, awarded compensation @ Rs. 39,3001- per bigha and denied benefit u/s. 2B(1A) -In another case in respect of identical land, High Court had awarded compensation @ Rs. 3. 45 lacks per ' bigha, which was scaled down to Rs. 76, 5501- per bigha by 0 Supreme Court - Held: Claimants are entitled to the compensation uls. 23(1A) rlw. s. 30(1)(b), since the award had not been made on or before 30. 04. 1982 - In view of the judgment in the case of identical land, compensation @ Rs.39,3001- not justified - However, the compensation is E scaled down by deducting 10% of the rate of Rs. 76, 5501- considering the fact that the lands have been already developed into plots. The High Court in the impugned or~er, relying on its previous judgment, awarded compensation @ Rs. 39,3001 F - per bigha for the land acquired under Land Acquisition Act, 1894. However, it specifically denied the claimants' entitlement to the benefit u/s. 23(1A). In appeal to this Court, claimants contended that G High Court was wrong in denying benefit u/s. 23(1A); and that High Court had wrongly fixed the compensation at Rs. 39,300/- per bigha, as in Bali Ram Sharma's case wherein the land acquired was also from the same village as in the pr,esent case, High Court had awarded H 1128 PREM CHAND & ORS. v. UNION OF INDIA 1129 compensation @ 3.45 lacks, which was scaled down to A Rs. 76,550/- per bigha by Supreme Court in appeal and that the claimants were at least entitled to the compensation @ 76,550/- per bigha. Partly allowing the appeal, the Court s· HELD: 1. The claimants would be entitled to the compensation u/s. 23(1A) r/w. Section 30(1)(b) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, since the award had not been made on or before 30.04.1982. The claimants would, therefore, be entitled to that benefit, though the benefit C seems to have been rejected by the High Court without giving any reasons. [Para 5] [1132-8-C] K.S. Paripooman v. State of Kera/a and Ors. 1994 (5) sec 593, followed. D 2. On the question of parity, the lands at the villages in 'Bali Ram Shanna's case are identically circumstanced. It would, therefore, not be proper to grant the compensation at much lesser rate of Rs.39,300/- per bigha. However, it is correct that the rate of Rs.76,550/- E is in respect of the Notification dated 17.11.1980 and the Notification in the present case was published only on 22.03.1978 and, therefore, some allowance would have to be given for that. Therefore, the compensation is scaled down by deducting 10 per cent of the rate of Rs.76,550/- considering the fact that the lands in this case have been found to be already developed into plots. The compensation shall be paid @ Rs.69,550/- plus the benefit u/s. 23(1-A) r/w. Section 30(1)(b) of the Act. [Para 8, 9] [1133-D-G-H; 1134-A-B] *Delhi Development Authority v. Bali Ram Sharma and Ors. 2004 (6) SCC 533; Union of India v. Harpat Singh and Ors. 2009 (8) SCALE 201, relied on. Karan Singh and Ors. v. Union of India 1997 (8) SCC 186, referred to. F G H A 8 c D E 1130 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 3 S.C.R. Case Law Reference: 1994 (5) sec 593 followed. Para 4 2004 (6) sec 533 relied on. Para 6 1997 (8) sec 186 referred to. Para 6 2009 (8) SCALE 201 relied on. Para 8 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2856 of 2010. From the Judgment & Order dated 11.12.2003 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in R.F.A. No. 149 of 1997. P.H. Parekh, Mohit Choudhary, Puja Sharma, P.K. Mohapatra, Ramesh Gopinathan for the Appellant. P.P. Malhotra, ASG, Shailender Sharma, Sadhana Sandhu (for Anil Katiyar) for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered V.S. SIRPURKAR, J. 1. Leave granted . . 2. This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court wherein the High Court has awarded the land acquisition compensation @ Rs.39,300/- per bigha. The High Court relied F on its earlier judgment without citing the same wherein it had fixed the land acquisition compensation @ Rs.34, 150/- per bigha in respect of the Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 19.08.1976. On that basis, the High Court, co
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.