Skip to main content

Full Bench summarises law on Land acquisition awards

Full Bench of Bombay High Court has held that if the possession is taken before the Section 4(1)of the Land Acquisition Act is published and/or before the award is passed, the land­ owner would been titled for interest as per Section 34 necessarily from the date of passing of the award under Section 11 of the said Act, except in cases where the possession is taken in accordance with Section 17 of the said Act, and in that situation only, the provision of Section 34 of the said Act shall start operating from the date of possession. Full Bench comprising of Justices B.P. Dharmadhikari, R.K.Deshpande and P.N Deshmukh answering the reference made to it, also summarised the position of law in this regard. The Bench observed as follows. If the possession of the land under acquisition is taken under Section 16 of the said Act i.e. after an award is made by the Collector under Section 11 therein,the interest would be payable under Section 34 from the date of passing of the award The interest as provided under Section 34 of the said Act shall start running from the date of possession only if the possession is taken by the Collector in exercise of his powers under Section 17 of the said Act which would obviously be after issuance of notice under Section 9(1) of the said Act.If the possession is taken under Section 17, the interest payable under Section 34 of the said Act shall start running from the date of possession and not from the date of award. Where the possession of the land under acquisition is taken prior to issuance of notification under Section 4(1), then there would be no question of invoking the urgency clause under Section 17 of the said Act and the interest under Section 34 shall start running from the date of passing of the award. The starting point for the purposes of calculating the amount of additional component under Section 23(1¬A) of the said Act at the rate of twelve per centum per annum is the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 of the said Act, and the terminal point is either the date of the award or the date of taking possession, whichever is earlier In none of the eventualities, the claimant shall be entitled to interest under Section 34 of the said Act from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act. There is no overlapping of the benefits under Section 23(1-A) and Section 34 of the said Act.The terminal points under Section 23(1¬A) are the starting points under Section 34 of the said Act and both the provisions operate in different fields. where possession is taken prior to issuance of notification under Section 4(1)of the said Act, the interest under Section 34 shall start running from the date of award only.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

MACT - Permanent disability - calculate - compensation - Supreme Court - Part 2

1) C. K. Subramonia Iyer vs. T. Kunhikuttan Nair - AIR 1970 SC 376 2) R. D. Hattangadi vs. Pest Control (India) Ltd. - 1995 (1) SCC 551 3) Baker vs. Willoughby - 1970 AC 467 4) Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Co.Ltd. - 2010(10) SCALE 298 5) Yadava Kumar v. D.M., National Insurance Co. Ltd. - 2010 (8) SCALE 567) 5. The heads under which compensation is awarded in personal injury cases are the following : Pecuniary damages (Special Damages) (i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation, nourishing food, and miscellaneous expenditure. (ii) Loss of earnings (and other gains) which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising : (a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment; (b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability. (iii) Future medical expenses. Non-pecuniary damages (General Damages) (iv) Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries. (v) Loss of amen

Distinction between “Loss to the Estate” and “Loss of Estate”

A subtle but fundamental distinction between “Loss of Estate” and “Loss to the Estate” was discussed in Omana P.K. and others v. Francis Edwin and others (2011 (4) KLT 952). This Judgment was challenged before the Apex Court, which has now dismissed the Appeal. The question raised in this case, was whether a certain sum which the dependants received as compensation for untimely death of Judgment debtor in a motor accident is attachable in Execution Proceedings. In this case, Justice Thomas P. Joseph speaking for the Kerala High Court had held the following (relying on The Chairman, A.P.S.R.T.C, Hyderabad vs. Smt. Shafiya Khatoon and Others) Capitalized value of the income spent on the dependents, subject to relevant deductions, is the pecuniary loss sustained by the members of his family through his death. The capitalized value of his income, subject to relevant deductions, would be the loss caused to the estate by his death. In other words, what amount the dependents would have got le

Full & Final payment - No dues certificate - end of contract

Whether after the contract comes to an end by completion of the contract work and acceptance of the final bill in full and final satisfaction and after issuance a `No Due Certificate' by the contractor Supreme Court of India Supreme Court of India R.L. Kalathia & Co. vs State Of Gujarat on 14 January, 2011 Author: P Sathasivam Bench: P. Sathasivam, B.S. Chauhan IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3245 OF 2003 R.L. Kalathia & Co Appellant(s) Versus State of Gujarat .... Respondent(s) JUDGMENT P. Sathasivam, J. 1) This appeal is directed against the judgment and final order dated 07.10.2002 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat whereby the High Court set aside the judgment and decree dated 14.12.1982 passed by the Civil Judge, (S.D.), Jamnagar directing the State Government to pay a sum of Rs.2,27,758/- with costs and interest and dismissed the Civil Suit as well as cross objections filed by the a