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

2023 Supreme(Ker) 413

GOPINATH P.
Unnikrishnan S/o Rajagopalan – Appellant
Versus
Arbitrator (District Collector), Thrissur – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: D. Anil Kumar.
For the Respondents: Lejo Joseph George, Preetha K.K.

JUDGMENT :

1. The amount of compensation determined by the ‘Competent Authority’ owing to the acquisition of land under the National Highways Act, 1956 (in short ‘the Act’) can be challenged before an ‘Arbitrator’ to be appointed by the Central Government in terms of Section 3-G(5) of the Act. In the State of Kerala, the District Collector of each district has been appointed as the Arbitrator by the Central Government under Section 3-G(5) of the Act. The short question that arises for consideration, in this case, is whether the petitioners are entitled to seek the appointment of an expert commission to assess the value of buildings/structures and also to lead evidence before the Arbitrator to establish their claim for the award of compensation at a rate higher than what has been awarded by the competent authority.

2. The petitioners have approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that applications filed by the petitioners for appointment of a commission for the inspection and valuation of the property, which was acquired for the purposes of the National Highway Development, as also the applications filed by the petitioners to examine certain witnesses are not being considered

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top