Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
STATE OF HARYANA
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SHANTI PARSHAD JAIN & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT10/05/1995
BENCH:
MANOHAR SUJATA V. (J)
BENCH:
MANOHAR SUJATA V. (J)
VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J)
CITATION:
1995 SCC (4) 532 1995 SCALE (3)607
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
THE 10TH DAY OF MAY, 1995
Present:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.S. Verma
Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sujata V. Manohar
Mr. Maninder Singh and Ms. Indu Malhotra, Advs. for the
appellant.
Mr. Prem Malhotra, Adv. for the Respondents.
J U D G M E N T
The following Judgement of the Court was delivered:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5654-55 OF 1995
(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 12914-14A of 1989)
State of Haryana .....Appellant
V.
Shanti Parshad Jain & Ors. .....Respondents
J U D G M E N T
Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J.
Delay condoned.
Special leave granted.
These appeals pertain to the land pertaining to the
respondents which has been acquired pursuant to Notification
dated 30.1.1973 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 and Notification dated 24.7.1973 under Section 6 of the
Land Acquisition Act,1894. The land has been acquired by the
appellant for the public purpose of development and
utilisation of land in the urban estate to be set up in the
area of village Hissar.
The Land Acquisition Collector by his award dated
5.9.1973 awarded compensation to the respondents for ‘A’
Category of land at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per acre and
for ‘B’ Category at the rate of Rs. 12,000/- per acre.
Aggrieved by this award, the respondents preferred a
reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act
before the Additional District Judge, Hissar. By his order
dated 23.1.1979, the Additional District Judge enhanced the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
award amount as set out therein. In an appeal from this
order, the High court by its order dated 9.12.1988 further
enhanced the compensation amount and also granted the
benefit of Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the amended Land
Acquisition Act to the respondents.
The only point urged before us by the appellant is in
respect of the benefit granted under Sections 23(1A), 23(2)
and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act to the respondents.
In this case both the award of the Collector as well as
the award by the court under a reference under Section 18 of
the Land Acquisition Act have been made prior to 30th of
April, 1982. Hence the benefit of Section 23(1A) cannot be
extended to the respondents. (See: K.S.Paripoornan v. State
of Kerala & Ors. (1994 (5) SCC 593).
The benefit of Sections 23(2) as well as 28 also is not
available to the respondents in the present case because
neither the award of the Collector nor the award by the
Court is after 30.4.1982 and before 24.9.1984. Unless the
appeal before the High Court or before us is in respect of
the award made by the Collector or the Court between
30.4.1982 and 24.9.1984 the benefit of the amended Sections
23(2) and 28 cannot be granted in such appeals. (See: Union
of India & Anr. v. Raghubir Singh (dead) by Lrs. etc. (1989
(3) SCR 316).
The appeals are accordingly allowed and the order of
the High Court insofar as it grants the benefit of amended
Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 to the respondents, is set
aside. In the circumstances of the case, however, there will
be no order as to costs.