LexTHE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KNNL versus SUBHASHCHANDRA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
* Author [2024] 3 S.C.R. 661 : 2024 INSC 208 The Executive Engineer, KNNL v. Subhashchandra & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 4053 of 2024) 12 March 2024 [Surya Kant* and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Huge chunk of land measuring 13000 acres was acquired by the State of Karnataka for the appellant-Corporation for different projects. High Court while passing the impugned orders enhancing the compensation for the acquired land, relied upon its own decisions which judgments did not find favour with this Court in earlier litigation as regards the same chunk of land and were remanded to High Court for reconsideration. Headnotes Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Award of compensation – Big chunk of land acquired for different projects at different points in time – Enhancement in compensation granted by the High Court varied from project to project – Supreme Court found that the High Court did not analyze each case independently, matters remanded to High Court – High Court while passing the impugned orders enhancing the compensation for the acquired land, relied upon said decisions which were set aside and were remanded to High Court for reconsideration – Plea of the appellant-Corporation that after the remand, the matter was heard in part by the High Court – Respondents- land owners contended that there were numerous cases in which similarly placed land owners have already been paid compensation at enhanced rate granted by the High Court and those judgments of the High Court attained finality and are not subject matter of these appeals: Held: It is not in dispute that a batch of cases was remanded by this Court for reconsideration by the High Court – It is also an admitted fact that those matters pertained to the same broader acquisition, though they possibly pertain to different projects – In a peculiar situation where some of the judgments of the High Court attained finality as the compensation amount, as enhanced, stands paid whereas the others are still subject matter of adjudication, 662 [2024] 3 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports these cases also remanded to the High Court so that a holistic view pertaining to the subject acquisition, at least project wise, can be taken by the High Court – High Court to make an endeavour to infuse uniformity in the matter of award of compensation, to the extent possible, in accordance with law. [Para 14] List of Acts Land Acquisition Act, 1894. List of Keywords Land Acquisition; Drinking water and irrigation projects/schemes; Award of compensation; Compensation enhanced. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.4053 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 22.03.2018 of the High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi in MSA No.200214 of 2017 With Civil Appeal Nos.4076, 4070, 4064, 4056, 4068, 4054, 4055, 4057, 4058, 4059, 4060, 4061, 4062, 4063, 4065, 4066, 4067, 4069, 4071, 4072, 4073, 4074, 4075, 4077, 4078, 4079, 4080, 4081, 4082, 4083, 4084, 4085, 4086, 4087, 4088 And 4089-4090 Of 2024 Appearances for Parties Naveen R. Nath, Sr. Adv., Ms. Hetu Arora Sethi, Abhimanyu Verma, Ms. Lalit Mohini Bhat, Ms. Disha Gupta, Advs. for the Appellant. Anand Sanjay M Nuli, Mrs. Kiran Suri, Sr. Advs., Suraj Kaushik, Agam Sharma, Nanda Kumar, Dharm Singh, M/s. Nuli & Nuli, Sharanagouda Patil, Harshvardhan Malipatil, Jyotish Pandey, Ms. Supreeta Sharanagouda, S. J. Amith, Mrs. S. Anuradha Bhat, Harisha S.R., Advs. for the Respondents. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Surya Kant, J. 1. Permission to file special leave petition is granted in Diary No.12213/2023. [2024] 3 S.C.R. 663 The Executive Engineer, KNNL v. Subhashchandra & Ors. 2. Delay condoned. 3. Leave granted. 4. These civil appeals impugn the judgements dated 28.02.2017, 28.11.2017, 15.02.2018, 20.02.2018, 21.02.2018, 02.03.2018, 22.03.2018, 06.04.2018, 13.04.2018, 26.04.2018, 07.12.2018, 12.12.2018, 14.01.2020, 24.01.2020 and 03.03.2021, passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench, whereby compensation for the acquired land was enhanced. The appellant-Karnataka Neeravari Nigam Limited (in short, “Corporation”) claims to be the beneficiary of the subject-acquisition. 5. The Corporation has been entrusted with the assignment to plan, execute and operate drinking water and irrigation projects and schemes in the State of Karnataka. About 13000 acres of land was acquired by the State of Karnataka for the appellant-Corporation f
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.