ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, UDAY UMESH LALIT
SATISH KUMAR GUPTA ETC. ETC. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent
Question 1? Question 2? Question 3?
Key Points: - Post-acquisition allottee has no locus to be heard in the process of determining compensation under Land Acquisition Act, 1894; not a necessary or proper party. (!) - State may transfer land by public auction or allotment at any price; mere reference to compensation price for allotment does not confer locus to contest enhancement. (!) (!) - Order 41 Rule 27 CPC on additional evidence: appellate court cannot admit evidence to fill lacunae; remand for fresh decision not warranted in these circumstances. (!) (!)
JUDGMENT
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.
These appeals have been preferred against judgment and order dated 06th October, 2015 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.F. A. Nos.4316 of 2010 etc. etc.
2. Question for consideration is whether a post-acquisition allottee of land is necessary or proper party or has any locus to be heard in the matter of determination of compensation under the scheme of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act). If not, whether the impugned order permitting additional evidence and directing remand is sustainable.
3. Facts giving rise to the question may be briefly noted. Huge chunks of land were acquired by the State of Haryana in different phases for the public purpose of setting-up Industrial Model Township by the Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation (HSIDC) in Gurgaon District in Haryana. Substantial part of the acquired land was allotted by the HSIDC to Maruti Suzuki India Limited (MSIL). One of the clauses in the Conveyance Deed executed in favour of the allottee provided that if compensation was enhanced, the allottee shall be liable to pay additional price on that basis. In HSIDC v. Pran Sukh, (2010) 11 SCC 175, issue of c
Himalayan Tiles and Marble (P) Ltd. v. Francis Victor Coutinho (Dead) by Lrs.
Santosh Kumar and ors. v. Central Warehousing Corporation and anr.
Hindu Kanya Maha Vidyalaya, Jind and anr. v. Municipal Committee, Jind and ors.
Neyvely Lignite Corporation Ltd. v. Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Neyvely and Ors.
P. Narayanappa and anr. v. State of Karnataka and ors.
ONGC v. Rameshbhai Jivanbhai Patel
Valliyammal v. Special Tehsildar (LA)
Peerappa Hanmantha Harijan (Dead) by legal representatives and ors. v. State of Karnataka and anr.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.