Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HEMANT M.PRACHCHHAK
Deputy General Manager – Appellant
Versus
Sutahr Ramanbhai Bababhai Since Died His Legal Heirs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.
1. Present appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 54 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 r/w Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment and award dated 25.09.2006 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Gandhinagar, (hereinafter referred to as the "Reference Court") in Land Acquisition Reference No. 156 of 2002 whereby the reference was partly allowed and the present appellant - O.N.G.C. was held liable to pay additional amount of compensation to the original claimants along with interest and costs.
3. The short facts giving rise to present appeal is that the competent authority under the LAND ACQUISITION ACT made a proposal for temporary acquisition of the lands situated at village Shertha, Taluka and District Gandhinagar, belonging to the respondents-original claimants. After following due procedure, the Land Acquisition Officer has passed award under Section 11 of the Act on 23.3.1988 and fixed the rate of rent of Rs.0.82/- per Sq. Mtr.
3.1. However, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the award, the original claimants raised dispute, by way of references being Land Acquisition Reference No. 156 o
The Reference Court exceeded its jurisdiction by awarding compensation after an excessive delay, which rendered the application time-barred under Article 137 of the Limitation Act.
Applications for compensation under the Land Acquisition Act must be filed within three years of the cause of action; excessive delays render such applications inadmissible.
The Reference Court lacks jurisdiction to grant compensation claims filed beyond the statutory limitation period under Section 35(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, with any contrary findings deemed ult....
Compensation for land acquisition must consider legal principles of escalation and delay, leading to justified adjustments based on precedents in similar cases.
The Referral Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a reference made outside the statutory limit prescribed by the Land Acquisition Act, reinforcing the mandatory nature of compliance with statutory t....
The limitation period under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act is strict and cannot be extended based on personal circumstances or knowledge of the judgment.
The main legal point established is that the reference Court must decide the claim on merits and determine the market value afresh based on the material produced before it, following the guidelines s....
The reference Court must consider all issues on their merits, and not dismiss a reference solely on the ground of limitation without considering other substantive issues.
Limitation for making reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 cannot be extended and Section 5 of Limitation Act shall not be applicable.
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
