SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(SC) 798

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ajay Rastogi, Abhay S. Oka, JJ.
Ambalal Babulal Patel Etc. Etc. - Appellants
Versus
The Group General Manager, ONGC & Anr. - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 385-386 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s).7086-7087 of 2017,
Civil Appeal No(S). 387-392 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP(Civil) No(s).7092-7097 of 2017), Civil Appeal No(s). 393-395 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP(Civil) No(s).7099-7101 of 2017), Civil Appeal No(s). 396-398 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP(Civil) No(S).7089-7091 of 2017), Civil Appeal No(s). 399-400 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP(Civil) No(s).5961-5962 of 2017)
Decided On : 19-01-2022

The Court's decision emphasized the importance of ensuring that any interference with compensation awards is supported by the material on record and is sustainable in law.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition Act - Compensation - The court restored the additional compensation awarded by the Reference Court, holding that the interference made by the High Court in reducing the additional compensation was neither supported by the material on record nor sustainable in law.

Fact of the Case:

The appellants were dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Division Bench of the High Court and approached the Court. The subject lands were acquired for the public purpose for ONGC under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Reference Court awarded additional compensation, which was challenged by ONGC before the High Court. The High Court modified the rate of compensation and reduced the additional compensation, leading to the present appeals.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the interference made by the High Court in reducing the additional compensation was neither supported by the material on record nor sustainable in law. Consequently, the additional compensation awarded by the Reference Court was restored, and the impugned judgment of the High Court was modified to that extent.

Issues: The main issue was the modification and reduction of additional compensation by the High Court, which was challenged by the appellants.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court, in exercising its power under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, restored the additional compensation awarded by the Reference Court, finding that the interference made by the High Court was not supported by the material on record and was not sustainable in law.

Final Decision: The appeals were disposed of, and the additional compensation awarded by the Reference Court was restored, with the impugned judgment of the High Court being modified accordingly.

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellants are the claimants and being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Division Bench of the High Court under the impugned judgment, have approached this Court by filing these instant appeals.

3. The subject lands in question are situated at Villages Pansar, Dhamasana and Isand which came to be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter being referred to as the “Act”) for the public purpose for ONGC. The notification under Section 4 of the Act came to be published and after going through the procedure prescribed under law, the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation under Section 11 of the Act.

4. Upon reference being made by the appellants-claimants in respect of the lands acquired at Villages Pansar/Dhamasana/Isand, the Reference Court awarded additional compensation, over and above the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, ONGC, Ahmedabad, under its respective orders along with interest and other statutory benefits under Section 23(1)(A) of the Act.

5. The orders passed by the Reference Court came to be challenged by respondent no.1 (ONGC) before the High Court and after hearing the parties, the High Court under its respective impugned judgments, while upholding the statutory benefits including interest, modified the rate of compensation and reduced the additional compensation for the land acquired at Villages Pansar/Dhamasana/Isand, Taluka Kalol, District Gandhinagar, which is the subject matter of challenge at the instance of the appellantsclaimants in the present batch of appeals.

6. After we have heard learned counsel for the parties, in our considered view, the Reference Court in exercise of its power under Section 18 of the Act, after appreciating the material available on record, awarded additional compensation to the claimants over and above the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, ONGC, Ahmedabad and the interference made by the High Court under the impugned judgment so far as the additional compensation assessed by the Reference Court is concerned, is neither supported by the material on record nor sustainable in law.

7. Consequently, additional compensation awarded by the Reference Court in the respective orders stands restored. The impugned judgment of the High Court, to the limited extent is accordingly modified.

8. The appeals in the above terms stand disposed of.

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top