THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. versus SHARAN PAL SINGH AND ORS.

Citation: [1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 665 · Decided: 14-12-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.S. VERMA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
SHARAN PAL SINGH AND ORS. 
DECEMBER 14, 1995 
[J.S. VERMA AND K. VENKATASWAMI, JJ.] 
B 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 
Sections 11 & 11-A-Award-Compensation-Award passed within the 
period stipulated under S.11-A-To be construed as an award under S.11 in C 
the proceedings for acquisition of lands-However it is open to parties to 
claim compensation for the buildings/trees in accordance with law. 
Govt. of Punjab issued notices under S.4(1) and declaration under 
S.6 of the Land Acquisition Act to acquire certain lands. An award 
was passed by the Land Acquisition Oflicer. Respondents challenged the D 
award as being not in conformity with S.11 of the Act in as much as the 
award has determined the compensation for the land only and the 
amount of compensation for the superstructure and trees standing on 
such lands was left to be decided separately. The High Court held that 
the acquisition proceedings would lapse in so far as the award related E 
to that portion of the acquired land on which the superstructure and 
trees were standing on the date of the award. Hence this appeal by the 
Government of Punjab. 
Allowing the appeals, this Court 
HELD : The impugned award dated 25th March, 1985 within the 
period specified in Section llA of the Land Acquisition Act must be 
construed as art award under Section 11 in the proceedings for tlie acquisi-
tion of the lands in question and the contentions to contrary cannot be 
sustained. However, it is left to the res1rnndents to claim compensation for 
the buildings/trees in accordance with law treating the award already made 
as one not awarding any compensation for the buildings/trees. [668-F-G] 
Mohanji & Another v. State of U.P. & Others, JT(1995) 8 SC 599, held 
applicable. 
665 
F 
G 
H 
666 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 
A 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 11850-53 
B 
c 
of 1995. 
Form the Judgment and Order dated 11.10.90 of the Punjab & 
Haryana High Court in C.W.P. Nos. 2246/85, 5604/87, 4345 and 5785 of 
1983. 
R.S. Yadav and G.K. Bansal for the Appellants. 
B.T. Singh, Ms. Naresh Bakshi and S.K. Mehta for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
K. VENKATASWAMI, J. Leave granted. 
By the impugned orders dated 11.10.1990, the High Court of Punjab 
& Haryana at Chandigarh has held that part of the land acquisition 
proceedings has lapsed for non-compliance of Section llA of the Land 
D Acquisition Act, 1894 which requires passing of an award within 2 years 
from the date of declaration under Section 6 of the Act. 
The appellant, State Government, issued notices under Section 4(1) 
and declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act on 1.6.1982 
E and 17.8.1983 respectively to acquire certain lands. Subsequently, an award 
was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 25.3.1985. The respondents 
challenged the award contending that the award was not in conformity with 
Section 11 of the Act inasmuch as the award has determined the compen-
sation for the land only and the amount of compensation regarding the 
superstructure and trees that were standing on such lands was left to be 
F 
decided separately. The appellant herein (respondent before the High 
Court) in its written statement took a stand in the following terms : 
G 
'The award is complete with respect of the land. It specifically 
mentioned therein that for the structures and trees the award will 
be announced separately, because the assessment for the structures 
and trees standing thereon had not been received from the respec-
tive departments.' 
However, the High Court has accepted the contention advanced on 
behalf of the respondents herein (petitioners before the High Court) and 
H held as follows : 
STATE v. SHARAN PAL SINGH 
667 
"The Land Acquisition Collector made the award on March 25, A 
1985 relating to the land and not for the super-structures and trees 
standing thereon. The award rendered by the Land Acquisition 
Collector was not the one envisaged under Section 11 of the Act. 
The same envisages the award for the Unit, namely, the land, 
buildings and super-structure and standing CROPS and trees B 
thereon. The acquisition proceedings would lapse in so far as the 
award relates to that portion of the acquired land on which the 
super-structures and trees were standing on the date the award 
has been made." 
Aggrieved by the above orders of the High Court the present appeals C 
are filed. 
An identic

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.