Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the order of the Reference Court (Joint District Judge, Nashik) dated 29th January 1992, which granted additional benefits to the claimant-respondent under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by Act 68 of 1984. The land of the respondent was acquired under Section 4 notification dated 17th July 1980. The Special Land Acquisition Officer made an award, and on reference under Section 18, the Reference Court passed an award on 10th January 1984 enhancing compensation. However, the Land Acquisition Act was amended with effect from 24th September 1984, introducing additional benefits: additional component at 12% per annum under Section 23(1-A), increased solatium from 15% to 30% under Section 23(2), and enhanced interest rates under Section 34 (9% for first year, 15% thereafter). The claimant filed a Review Application No.31 of 1986 seeking these benefits, which the Reference Court allowed. The State challenged this order, arguing that the Reference Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the review as the award was already passed before the amendment. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Reference Court had jurisdiction because the reference was pending on the date the amendment came into force, and the amendment applied to pending proceedings. The Court noted that the amendment was intended to benefit claimants and that the Reference Court correctly granted the additional benefits. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Review Application - Jurisdiction - Reference Court has jurisdiction to entertain review application seeking additional benefits under Amending Act 68 of 1984, even if original award was passed before amendment, as the reference was pending on the date of amendment - The Court held that the Reference Court correctly granted additional benefits under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as the amendment applies to pending proceedings (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Reference Court had jurisdiction to entertain a review application seeking additional benefits under the Amending Act 68 of 1984, when the original award was passed before the amendment came into force but the reference was pending on the date of amendment.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the order of the Reference Court granting additional benefits to the claimant. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Jurisdiction of Reference Court to entertain review application
- Applicability of Amending Act 68 of 1984 to pending references
- Entitlement to additional benefits under Sections 23(1-A)
- 23(2) and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (05) 41
First Appeal No.599 of 1994
Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, J.
Mr. Ameet Palkar, A.G.P., for the Appellant-State. None for the Respondent-Claimant.
Pandurang Ramchandra Jagtap
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal against order of Reference Court granting additional benefits under amended Land Acquisition Act.
Remedy Sought
The State of Maharashtra sought to set aside the order of the Reference Court granting additional benefits to the claimant.
Filing Reason
The State challenged the jurisdiction of the Reference Court to entertain a review application after the original award was passed.
Previous Decisions
The Reference Court had passed an award on 10th January 1984 enhancing compensation. Later, on a review application, it granted additional benefits under the amended Act on 29th January 1992.
Issues
Whether the Reference Court had jurisdiction to entertain a review application seeking additional benefits under the Amending Act 68 of 1984, when the original award was passed before the amendment came into force but the reference was pending on the date of amendment.
Submissions/Arguments
The Appellant-State argued that the Reference Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the review application as the award was already passed on 10th January 1984, before the amendment came into force.
The Respondent-Claimant sought additional benefits under the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Ratio Decidendi
The Reference Court has jurisdiction to entertain a review application seeking additional benefits under the Amending Act 68 of 1984, even if the original award was passed before the amendment, as the reference was pending on the date the amendment came into force. The amendment applies to pending proceedings and the claimant is entitled to the additional benefits.
Judgment Excerpts
The challenge in this Appeal is to the Judgment and Order dated 29th January 1992 passed by the Reference Court of Joint District Judge at Nashik, thereby correcting its Award dated 10th January 1984 in Land Reference No.172 of 1984 and directing the State to pay the interest @ 15% p.a. until the entire compensation amount is paid to the Respondent-Claimant or it is deposited in the Court.
The first and foremost submission advanced by learned A.G.P. is that, as the Reference was already decided, when the Award was passed by the Trial Court on 10th January 1984 itself, the Trial Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the Review Application filed by the Respondent-Claimant.
Procedural History
The land was acquired under Section 4 notification dated 17th July 1980. The Special Land Acquisition Officer made an award. The claimant filed a reference under Section 18, which was decided by the Joint District Judge, Nashik, on 10th January 1984 enhancing compensation. The Land Acquisition Act was amended by Act 68 of 1984 with effect from 24th September 1984. The claimant filed Review Application No.31 of 1986 seeking additional benefits. The Reference Court allowed the review on 29th January 1992. The State appealed to the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4, Section 18, Section 23, Section 23(1-A), Section 23(2), Section 34
