LexU.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD versus SHEO NARAIN KUSHWAHA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2011] ·5 $.C.R.. 869
U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD
v.
SHEO NARAIN KUSHWAHA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 3615 of. ~01.1)
. .
APRIL.25, 2011
. '
[R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.]
A
B
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 :.... s. · 54 ~ Appeal under ,-
Acquisition of certain' lands of respondent for benefit of
appellant - Compensation of Rs. 10, 2501- per bigha awarded
C
by the Land Acquisition Collector, enhanced to Rs. 1, 10,250
per bigha by the Reference ·Court~ Appeal u/s. 54. - Division
Bench of the High Court upholding the award of Rs. 1, 10, 250/
- per bigha as compensation dismissed the appeal summarily
by a non-speaking order - On appeal, held: Under s. 54, a
party aggrieved by the award of the Reference Court is entitled
to file an appeal against the award of the Reference Court as
of right - Such appeals which mostly relate to the correctness
of the quantum of compensation or apportionment, raise both
questions of facts as well as questions of Jaw - Provisions of
Or. ·41 CPC are made applicable to such appeals -Thus, if
the High Court wants to dismiss an appeal summarily without
issuing notice, it should assign brief reasons, though not
required to render a 'brief judgment' - On facts, on the basis
of the rate of Rs.45 per sq.yd. awarded by the Reference
Court, the price of a bigha comprising 2250 sq.yds., would be
Rs.1,01,250 and not Rs.1, 10,250 - Thus, there is an error
apparent on the face of the award of the Reference Court -
Also, several other appeals relating to the same notification, .
against similar fixation of market value by the Reference
Court were already admitted by the High Court - Thus, the
appeal raised sufficient grounds which require to be dealt with
and decided by the High Court on merits - Matter is remitted
to the High Court for disposal of the appeal on merits - Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Or. 41 r. 11.
869
870
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
(2011) 5 S.C.R.
A
Land acquisition - Measurement of land area - Units of
measurement - Held: A 'bigha' as a unit of measurement
varies in extent in different parts of India -
In public
documents, deeds of conveyance and judicial orders, it is
advisable to use units of measurement which have the same
B meaning in all parts of the country - Description by standard
units of measurement would be the solution.
c
D
E
Judgment/Order: 'Summary decision' -
Held: Is a
decision which is short and quick and not elaborate but that
does not mean 'non-reasoned dismissal.
Hari Shanker vs. Rao Girdhari Lal Chowdhury AIR 1963
SC 698; Kiranmal Zumerlal Borana Marwadi vs. Dnyanoba
Bajirao Khot 1983 (4) SCC 223; Jayanmti De vs. Abani Kanta
Barat AIR 2000 SC 3578 - referred to.
The Advanced Law Lexicon by P. Ramanatha Iyer 3rd
Edn, Vol.1 p 528 - referred to.
Case Law Reference:
AIR 1963 SC 698
1983 (4) sec 223
AIR 2000 SC 3578
Referred to
Referred to
Referred to
Para 3
Para 8
Para 8
F
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
3615 of 2011.
G
From the Judgment & Order dated 20.12.2005 of the High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad in First Appeal No .. 390 of
2005.
Vishwajit Singh, Ritesh Agrawal, Abhindra Maheswari for
the Appellant.
Dr. Madan Sharma, Vijay Kumar Pandita, J.P. Tripathi,
Asha Upadhyay, R.D. Upadhyay, Sanjay Visen, Ashutosh Kr.
H Sharma, Gunnam Venkateswara Rao for the Respondents.
U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD v. SHEO
NARAIN KUSHWAHA
The Order of the Court was delivered by
ORDER
R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J. 1. Leave granted. Heard.
871
A
2. The appellant, for whose benefit certain lands (including
B
the land of respondents) at village Daulatpur, District Kanpur
were acquired, filed an appeal before the Allabahad High Court
challenging the judgment of the Reference Court which
increased the compensation for the acquired land of
respondents from Rs.10,250/- per bigha to Rs.1,10,250/- per c
bigha. The said appeal has been dismissed summarily by a
division bench of the Allahabad High Court, by the impugned
non-speaking order dated 20.12.2005 upholding the award of
. Rs.1, 10,250/- per bigha as compensation. The High Court has
stated that it was doing so, in exercise of the power under Order
0
41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('Code' for short).
The said order is challenged in this appeal by special leave.
3. The appeal in question was filed under section 54 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ·LA Act') which
provides that an appeal shall lie in any pExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.