Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, UDAY KUMAR
Chandan Baral – Appellant
Versus
Faisal Hussain – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of plot acquisition and ownership. (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments regarding jurisdiction and title determination by cala. (Para 2 , 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. court's role and analysis of jurisdiction under the 1956 act. (Para 3 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 4. ratio of legal authority and procedural guidelines for compensation disputes. (Para 9 , 14 , 17 , 22) |
| 5. final conclusion affirming the learned judge's order. (Para 55 , 56 , 57) |
JUDGMENT :
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.
1. Both the above appeals have been preferred against a common judgment of a learned Single Judge dated May 1, 2025 by which two writ petitions bearing WPA No. 3419 of 2025 and WPA No. 4469 of 2025 were allowed, thereby setting aside Order No. 4 dated November 27, 2024 passed by the Competent Authority of Land Acquisition (CALA), Purulia, apportioning compensation payable for acquisition of Plot No. 786 in Mouza – Belguma, JL No. 41, in connection with LA Case No. 21 of 2015/9H-32, for NH-32 Project Work under the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1956 Act”) between the present appellants.
2. The short issue involved in the present appeal is the interplay between sub-sections
The Competent Authority under the National Highways Act lacks jurisdiction to resolve disputes regarding the apportionment of compensation, necessitating referral to the Principal Civil Court when su....
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that disputes regarding apportionment of compensation under the National Highways Act should be referred to the principal civil court of origin....
The competent authority under the National Highways Act lacks jurisdiction to apportion compensation and must refer such disputes to the Principal Civil Court.
The competent authority under the National Highways Act lacks jurisdiction to decide apportionment disputes, which must be referred to the Principal Civil Court.
(1) Acquisition of land – If any dispute arises as to apportionment of amount or any part thereof or to any person to whom same or any part thereof is payable, then, competent authority shall refer d....
The main legal principle established is that a genuine dispute must arise for referral to the civil court under Section 3H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956, emphasizing the need for disputes that....
The competent authority must refer disputes regarding apportionment of compensation to the Principal Civil Court as per Section 3-H(4) of the National Highway Act, 1956.
Point of Law : It is a settled principle of interpretation of statute that the provisions of any statute are to be interpreted to give effect to each of them to the extent possible without giving any....
If sub-section (2) of Section 3H of the Act of 1956 is looked into, the jurisdiction of the competent authority is nothing but to pay the compensation to the person or persons entitled thereto.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
