In a recent legal case surrounding a land acquisition compensation dispute, the court made significant rulings regarding the apportionment of compensation and the rights of the parties involved. The court’s analysis and orders shed light on the intricate legal aspects of the case. Learn more about the legal implications and proceedings in our detailed blog post.
Facts
- The Land Acquisition Officer declared the award on 15.09.2010 for the land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
- State of Gujarat and its authorities filed First Appeal No. 479/2021 against the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court.
- The State filed a civil application for stay, which was granted by an interim order on 16.02.2021.
- The dispute in the application for impleadment revolves around the apportionment of the compensation amount.
- Respondent No.1, claiming to be the subsequent purchaser, sought a reference under Section 30 of the Act 1894 to be joined as a party respondent in the First Appeal.
- The High Court permitted respondent No.1 to be joined as a party respondent in the First Appeal on 26.10.2021.
- The original claimant and landowner, respondent No.1, objected to paying the awarded amount to the appellant, claiming entitlement to the enhanced compensation as a subsequent purchaser.
- A reference was made under Section 18 of the Act 1894 for enhancement of compensation at the instance of the appellant claiming to be the original landowner.
Also Read: Challenging Legal Presumptions in Negotiable Instrument Cases
Analysis
- Respondent No.1, the original applicant, cannot be impleaded in the First Appeal.
- The State has challenged the judgment and award passed by the Reference Court.
- The Reference Court had enhanced the amount of compensation at the instance of the original landowner, the appellant herein.
- The entire amount of compensation deposited by the State shall be invested in the name of the Nazir of the Reference Court in cumulative fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for an initial period of three years.
- In the proceedings under Section 30 of the Act 1894, the order of apportionment shall be passed and the party in whose favor the order is passed can withdraw 50% of the compensation as per the High Court’s order dated 16.02.2021.
- Proceedings under Section 30 of the Act 1894 shall be decided without being influenced by the present order and treated as an interim arrangement.
- Respondent No.1 has raised a dispute regarding apportionment of the compensation under Section 30 of the Act 1894.
- Appellant cannot withdraw the compensation until the dispute over apportionment is resolved.
- The High Court’s order permitting respondent No.1 to be impleaded in the First Appeal is quashed, but without prejudice to the parties’ rights in the pending Section 30 proceedings.
- The appellant is prohibited from withdrawing the compensation until the conclusion of the Section 30 proceedings.
Also Read: Legal Analysis of Admission Irregularities in Educational Institutions
Case Title: PATEL KODARBHAI MOHANBHAI Vs. SONATA CERAMICA PVT. LTD. (2022 INSC 1014)
Case Number: C.A. No.-006902-006902 / 2022
