Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MANISH CHOUDHURY
Chandan Moy Nath – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.
Both the writ petitions – W.P.[C] no. 6644/2024 & W.P.[C] no. 442/2025 – are instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking inter-alia a direction to the respondent authorities to pay adequate compensation to the petitioners after making proper assessment and valuation in respect of the parcels of land, acquired from the petitioners in both the writ petitions. The petitioners have also sought for a direction to the respondent authorities to comply with the provisions of the National Highways Act, 1956, more particularly, Section 3G[5] and Section 3H before taking possession of the parcels of land for the intended public purpose. The petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to communicate the amounts of compensation determined against their respective parcels of land to the petitioners
2. As both the writ petitions involve issues of similar nature and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, both the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. I have heard Mr. B.U. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions; Mr. C. Baruah, lear
The court ruled that compensation for land acquisition must reflect market value and consider hardships faced by landowners, as mandated by the National Highways Act and RFCTLARR Act.
Petitioner must approach the appointed Arbitrator for grievances regarding compensation assessment under the National Highways Act, 1956.
Narrow scope of judicial interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI land compensation; no re-appreciation of evidence.
Narrow scope of judicial interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI land compensation awards; no re-appreciation of evidence.
Narrow scope of interference under Sections 34/37 Arbitration Act in NHAI awards; no re-appreciation of evidence or modification of compensation.
Courts under Sections 34/37 cannot re-appreciate evidence in NHAI arbitration awards; interference limited to perversity or public policy.
Market value for highway land compensation must follow statutory higher of stamp duty rates or average similar land sales using multiple deeds; single dissimilar sale deed use creates patent illegali....
The court affirmed an arbitral award on compensation for land acquisition, stating the determination conformed to relevant statutes, rejecting the appeal for lacking merit.
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
