Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Bhujanga and Uttam Sarkate, were owners of land in Survey No.372, admeasuring 2.74 hectares, in village Haral, District Washim. The State of Maharashtra acquired the land for construction of a dam under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Section 4 notification was published on 13/11/1997, Section 6 notification on 12/01/2000, and the final award on 02/06/2000. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs.1,45,314/-. Dissatisfied, the appellants sought a reference under Section 18, claiming compensation at Rs.3,00,000/- per hectare and Rs.90,000/- for trees and well. The Reference Court (Civil Judge, Senior Division, Washim) in Land Acquisition No.98/2002, by order dated 05/04/2010, enhanced compensation to Rs.3,28,800/- for land and Rs.80,253/- for trees and well, totaling Rs.16,03,613/-. The acquiring body, Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (VIDC), challenged this order before the High Court on the ground that it was not made a party. The High Court, by judgment dated 29/04/2016, allowed the appeal, set aside the order, and remanded the matter to the Reference Court with directions to implead VIDC and to give liberty to parties to prosecute proceedings afresh. After remand, the Reference Court passed the impugned judgment and order dated 19/04/2017 without providing the appellants an opportunity to lead evidence and without considering the evidence already adduced in the earlier reference. The appellants filed the present appeal challenging this judgment. The High Court held that the Reference Court violated principles of natural justice by not giving the appellants a fair hearing and by not considering the evidence on record. The impugned judgment was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Reference Court for fresh adjudication, with directions to give both parties an opportunity to lead evidence and to decide the reference in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Compensation - Enhancement - Sections 18, 23, 28, 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The appellants' land was acquired for a dam; the Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.1,45,314/-. The Reference Court initially enhanced compensation to Rs.3,28,800/- for land and Rs.80,253/- for trees and well, totaling Rs.16,03,613/-. On appeal by the acquiring body (VIDC), the High Court remanded the matter for impleading VIDC and for fresh adjudication. After remand, the Reference Court passed the impugned judgment without giving the appellants an opportunity to lead evidence and without considering the evidence already adduced in the earlier reference. Held that the Reference Court's failure to provide an opportunity to lead evidence and to consider the existing evidence violated principles of natural justice, warranting setting aside of the impugned judgment and remand for fresh consideration. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Reference Court, after remand, violated principles of natural justice by not providing the appellants an opportunity to lead evidence and by not considering the evidence already on record, thereby affecting the determination of fair compensation for acquired land.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 19/04/2017, and remanded the matter to the Reference Court for fresh adjudication. The Reference Court was directed to give both parties an opportunity to lead evidence and to decide the reference in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observations in the judgment.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Sections 4
- 6
- 18
- 23
- 28
- 34
- Natural Justice
- Right to be heard
- Remand
- Compensation enhancement
