Supreme Court Allows Appellant in Land Acquisition Matter — Application for Reference Confirmed. Court directed Reference Court to decide application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal against a judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh regarding a land acquisition matter. The appellant, Muthyam Agaiah Goud, challenged the High Court's decision dated February 18, 2005, in Review W.P. M.P.No.26782 of 2004, which arose from W.P.No.22429 of 1996. During proceedings, a question arose concerning whether the claimant-appellant had filed an application for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the original records, confirmed that such an application had indeed been filed. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Reference Court to decide the application in accordance with law, ensuring that the parties were heard and a reasoned order was passed within six months. The appeal was allowed, and no costs were awarded.

Headnote

A) Land Acquisition - Reference Application - Application Under Section 18 - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Court confirmed that an application for reference was indeed filed by the appellant, necessitating a review of the impugned order. The case was sent back to the Reference Court for a decision on the application after hearing the parties and passing a reasoned order within six months. Held that the original records supported the appellant's claim (Paras 3-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the claimant-appellant had filed an application for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Reference Court to decide the application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, after hearing the parties and passing a reasoned order within six months.

Law Points

  • Land Acquisition
  • Reference Application
  • Section 18
  • Review Jurisdiction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2009 LawText (SC) (08) 25

Civil Appeal No.5073 of 2009

2009-08-04

Tarun Chatterjee, R.M. Lodha

Muthyam Agaiah Goud

Land Acquisition Officer & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal concerning land acquisition proceedings.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to confirm the filing of an application for reference under Section 18.

Filing Reason

To challenge the High Court's order regarding the application for reference.

Previous Decisions

The High Court had previously ruled on the matter without acknowledging the application under Section 18.

Issues

Whether the claimant-appellant had filed an application for reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that an application for reference was filed, which was not acknowledged by the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi

The Court emphasized the necessity of reviewing the original records to confirm the filing of the application for reference, thereby ensuring due process in land acquisition matters.

Judgment Excerpts

The impugned order is set aside. The appeal is thus allowed to the extent indicated above.

Procedural History

The appeal was directed against the final judgment and order of the High Court dated February 18, 2005, which arose from earlier proceedings in W.P.No.22429 of 1996.

Acts & Sections

  • Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 18
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order Under PIT NDPS Act Due to Non-Application of Mind and Lack of Live Link. Preventive detention order was invalid as detaining authority failed to consider bail status and relied on stale incidents without contempo...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Transfer of Matrimonial Case to Chandigarh Due to Convenience of Parties. Transfer Granted to Facilitate Petitioner's Attendance at Hearings in Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.