SHRI AMBYA KALYA MHATRE (D) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS & ORS. versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Citation: [2011] 15 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 12-09-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.V. RAVEENDRAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

---
[2011] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 1 
SHRI AMBYA KALYA MHATRE (D) THROUGH LEGAL 
HEIRS & ORS. 
v. 
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
(Civil Appeal No. 7784 of 2011) 
SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN, H.L. GOKHALE AND 
GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - ss. 18 and 23 - Lands C 
belonging to appellants acquired for New Bombay project -
Reference to civil Court uls. 18 - Right of the landowner to 
amend the amount claimed in the reference application and 
seek higher compensation - Limitation period for such 
amendment - Held: As the Land Acquisition Act does not o 
require the person aggrieved/landowner to specify the amount 
of compensation sought, when objecting to the amount of 
compensation and seeking a reference, mentioning of the 
amount of compensation sought is optional - Since there -is 
no obligation to specify the amount in the application for E 
reference, it can be specified in the claim statement filed 
before the Reference Court - The period of limitation in s. 18 
has nothing to do with specifying the amount of compensation 
claimed - Consequently if the reference is in regard to 
objection to the amount of compensation, the Reference Court F 
can permit amendment of the claim relating to compensation 
- What is not permitted after the expiry of the period of 
limitation specified in s. 18, is changing the nature of 
objections from one category to another - If the reference had 
been sought with reference to objection to amount of 
compensation, the land owner cannot after the period of G 
/imitation, seek amendment to change the claim as objection 
to measurement or objection to apportionment - State of 
Maharashtra has a special provision in the Bombay Court 
1 
H 
2 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 
A Fees Act which requires every claimant who makes an 
application to the Collector for reference to court uls. 18 to pay 
one half the ad valorem fee on the difference between the 
amount awarded by the Collector and the amount claimed by 
the claimant -
Thus application uls. 18 objecting to the 
B compensation by implication is required to disclose the 
amount of compensation sought and pay court fee on the 
increase sought - But this is only a requirement in regard to 
the said Court Fees Act - This only means that if the claim 
is amended later, additional court fee may have to be paid -
c This requirement under the said Court Fees Act cannot be 
read as a requirement under the Land Acquisition Act - So 
Jong as Land Acquisition Act is not amended to require the 
person aggrieved to specify the amount of compensation 
claimed by him in the reference application, the bar of 
0 
/imitation will not apply even if the amount is specified in the 
application for reference and subsequently a higher amount 
is sought by way of amendment - Time limit uls. 18 is only 
for seeking the reference by raising the objection to the 
amount of compensation or any of the other three objections 
- The land owner or persons aggrieved will have to give only 
E ·the nature of objection to the award, that is whether it is with 
reference to measurement or compensation or person to 
whom it is payable or apportionment, and briefly mention the 
grounds in support of it - Though the land owner can give the 
details of his claim and quantum, he is not bound to do so -
F When the reference is made, he can give the particulars of 
the claim for compensation or additional particulars or even 
increase the claim - Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959 -
Schedule I, Entry 15. 
G 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - ss. 18 and 23 - Reference 
H 
to civil Court uls. 18 - Where the landowner sought increase 
in compensation for only the land, in application uls. 18, 
whether he can seek increase in compensation for the trees 
or structures also, before the Reference Court - Held: Wh_en 
AMBYA KALYA MHATRE (D) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS v. 
3 
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 
the Act refers to acquisition of 'land', the reference is not only A 
to land but also to land, building, trees and anything attached 
to the earth - In the absence of any restriction in s. 18, and 
the respective roles assigned by the Act to the Land 
Acquisition Collector and the Reference Court in the context 
of making a reference and determining the compensation, it B 
is clear that once the reference is made in regard to amount 
of compensation, the Reference Court will have complete 
jurisdiction to decide the compensation for the land, buildings 
and trees and
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.