Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment and award dated 6.1.90 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Raigad at Alibag in L.A.R. No.9 of 1984, which enhanced compensation for land acquired for a gas-based fertilizer plant. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had issued notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 12.10.78 and Section 6 on 4.11.78, and awarded compensation on 9.3.81 at Rs.4000 per acre. The claimants sought reference under Section 18 claiming Rs.50,000 per hectare. The reference court awarded Rs.357 per Are. The State argued that the reference was time-barred and that the claimants were barred by unamended Section 25 for failing to respond to Section 9 notice. The High Court held that the reference was within limitation as it was filed within six months from the award date. It also held that the bar under unamended Section 25 did not apply because the claimants had made a claim before the Land Acquisition Officer and the court could award compensation based on evidence. The court found the compensation rate of Rs.357 per Are reasonable and dismissed the appeal and cross-objections.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Limitation for Reference - Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Reference filed on 24.1.84 against award dated 9.3.81 - Court held that the reference was within limitation as the period of limitation is six months from the date of award and the reference was filed within that period (Paras 9-11).
B) Land Acquisition - Bar under Unamended Section 25 - Section 25 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Claimants failed to reply to notice under Section 9 - Court held that the bar under unamended Section 25 does not apply as the claimants had made a claim before the Land Acquisition Officer and the reference court had discretion to award compensation based on evidence (Paras 10-12).
C) Land Acquisition - Compensation Rate - Determination of market value - Reference court awarded Rs.357 per Are based on evidence - Court upheld the rate as reasonable and not excessive (Paras 13-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was filed within limitation and whether the claimants were barred by unamended Section 25 of the Act from claiming enhanced compensation.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed; cross-objections dismissed; no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Limitation for reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Bar under unamended Section 25 of Land Acquisition Act
- Compensation rate determination based on evidence
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (01) 66
First Appeal No.355 of 1991
Ms.V.S.Mhaispurkar (A.G.P. for appellant), Mr.S.M.Kamble (for respondents)
Kashiram Nathu Mohite & Ors.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against judgment and award in land acquisition reference enhancing compensation.
Remedy Sought
State sought to set aside the enhanced compensation awarded by the reference court.
Filing Reason
State aggrieved by the reference court's award of compensation at Rs.357 per Are.
Previous Decisions
Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded Rs.4000 per acre on 9.3.81; reference court enhanced to Rs.357 per Are on 6.1.90.
Issues
Whether the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was filed within limitation?
Whether the claimants were barred by unamended Section 25 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 from claiming enhanced compensation?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant (State): Reference was time-barred as filed beyond limitation; claimants failed to reply to Section 9 notice, hence bar under unamended Section 25 applies.
Respondents (Claimants): Reference was within limitation; they had made a claim before the Land Acquisition Officer; compensation awarded is just and proper.
Ratio Decidendi
The reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is within limitation if filed within six months from the date of award. The bar under unamended Section 25 does not apply if the claimant has made a claim before the Land Acquisition Officer, and the court has discretion to award compensation based on evidence.
Judgment Excerpts
The learned A.G.P. appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the reference court erred in coming to the conclusion that the respondents original claimants filed reference application under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was within time.
The learned A.G.P. appearing on behalf of applicant submits that the reference court ought to have held that the respondents original claimants failed to claim any compensation pursuant to the notice under section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act and therefore, bar under unamended section 25 of the Land Acquisition Act, comes into operation.
Procedural History
Notification under Section 4 dated 12.10.78; Section 6 dated 4.11.78; Award by Special Land Acquisition Officer on 9.3.81; Reference under Section 18 filed on 24.1.84; Reference court judgment and award on 6.1.90; State filed First Appeal No.355 of 1991; Cross-objections by claimants; Heard on 12.1.2011; Judgment on 21.1.2011.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4, Section 6, Section 9, Section 18, Section 25
