Shri Irshad Ali & Ors vs Hazi Abdul Sukhur Mozumdar & Ors
- SCC(1997) 7 SCC 88
- Neutral1997 INSC 528
- SCR[1997] Supp (1) SCR 472
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a party entitled to a share of acquired land does not challenge an award of compensation made by a Reference Court under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, that award becomes final as to that party's share, and the party is not entitled to claim any higher compensation in a subsequent appeal, notwithstanding that other interested parties may have obtained enhanced compensation through their own appeals.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Hon'ble mr. Justice K. Ramaswamy Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.P. Wadhwa Shakeel Ahmed Syed, Adv. for the appellants Vijay Hansaria, Ms. Smita Shankar, and S.K. Jain, Advs. for the Respondents O R D E R The following order of the Court was delivered:
Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties.
This appeal arises against the judgement and order dated July 12,1996 in Review Application No. 1 of 1995 and the main judgment dated October 8, 1993 in First Appeal No.8 of 1989.
The admitted position is that the appellant is entitled to 1/3rd share of the acquired land. The total extent of the land acquired is 10 Bighas, 15 Khatas, chattaks and 5 gondas. The Land Acquisition officer awarded compensation against which the parties sought reference for re- determination of compensation etc. under section 18 of the Land acquisition Act. The Reference Court by its award dated September 7, 1988 enhanced the Compensation. and awarded compensation. To the extent of the Claim of the respondent no. 1., namely, bighas, 16 kathas, 1 chatak, namely 1/3rd of the entire land, he filed an appeal under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act. The High Court enhanced the Compensation, Thereafter, the appellant filed his application under Order 47, Rule 1, CPC for review of the order. After reconsidering the matter and the main order, the high Court dismissed the same. Thus, this appeal by special leave. In View of the Fact that the total extent of the land is 10 Bighas, 15 kathas, 2 chattaks, 2 gandas, as referred earlier, in which admittedly respondent No.1 is having 1/3rd share, the first respondent had waived his claim for higher compensation for the above extent of the land. Since the appellants had not challenged the award of the reference Court and the award has become final to the extent of their share, they are entitled to any higher compensation for the extent of 1/3rd share.
The appeals are therefore, dismissed. No costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free