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

2022 Supreme(J&K) 498

JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAMMU
Sanjay Dhar, J.
Collector Land Acquisition & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Sham Lal & Ors. – Respondents
MA No. 167 of 2009, IA No. 247 of 2009 in MA No. 78 of 2006 and IA No. 100 of 2006
Decided On : 18-11-2022

Advocates appeared:
S.S. Nanda, Sr. AAG, for the Appellant; L.K. Sharma, Sr. Advocate and Mohit Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondents

Once proprietary rights were conferred under the Agrarian Reforms Act, the land ceased to be within the Act's purview, entitling the respondents to full compensation under the Land Acquisition Act.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition - Entitlement to Full Compensation - Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990 - Section 18/31 - Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 - Section 8 - Circular No. REV (L-B) 10/80 - Schedule-II and Schedule-III - Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958 - Govt. Order No. S-432 of 1966

Fact of the Case:

The appeals involved the question of whether allottees of land under Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958, on whom proprietary rights were conferred under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976, were entitled to full compensation under the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the respondents were entitled to full compensation as proprietary rights had been conferred upon them, and the land had undergone a change in character, ceasing to be the land specified under Schedule-II of the Agrarian Reforms Act.

Issues: The main issue was the entitlement of the respondents to full compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, considering the proprietary rights conferred under the Agrarian Reforms Act and the applicability of Circular No. REV (L-B) 10/80 and Schedule-III provisions.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that once proprietary rights were conferred, the land ceased to be within the purview of the Agrarian Reforms Act, and the respondents were entitled to full compensation. The court also emphasized that the mutations attested in favor of the respondents were intact and had never been challenged, further supporting their entitlement to full compensation.

Final Decision: The appeals lacked merit, and the court dismissed them, affirming the entitlement of the respondents to full compensation.

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Dhar, J. - Through the medium of this common judgment, both these two appeals filed by the Collector Land Acquisition against two separate judgments, one dated 17.05.2008 and the other dated 12.09.2005 passed by learned District Judge, Udhampur, are proposed to be disposed of. Both these appeals give rise to same question of law as such, the same are being taken up together for their decision.

2. Vide CIMA No. 78/2006, Collector Land Acquisition, Udhampur has challenged the judgment dated 12.09.2005 passed by the learned District Judge, Udhampur in a reference under section 18/31 of Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990 whereby the respondents have been held entitled to full amount of compensation for the land that has been acquired for the purpose of construction of by-pass road in village Barrian Tehsil and District Udhampur.

3. Vide CIMA No. 167/2009, Collector Land Acquisition, Udhampur has challenged the judgment dated 17.05.2008 passed by the learned District Judge, Udhampur whereby the respondents have been held entitled to full compensation in respect of land that has been acquired for construction of Govt. Middle School at village Sajalta.

4. The common question of law that arises for determination in both these appeals is as to whether the allottees of land under Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958 dated 05.06.1998 on whom proprietary rights have been conferred under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976 are entitled to full compensation in a case where their land has been acquired in terms of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990.

5. The factual aspects arising in these two appeals are not in dispute. The predecessors-in-interest of the respondents in both these appeals were allotted the State land in terms of Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958 dated 05.06.1958 and afterwards the allottees of the land were conferred the ownership rights of the allotted land in terms of Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Agrarian Reforms Act, 1976. The lands, which are the subject matter of these two appeals, were acquired by the Collector for the different public purposes as mentioned hereinbefore and two different awards came to be passed by the Collector.

6. After assessing the compensation in both the cases, the Collector has held the respondents entitled to one-third of the assessed compensation in respect of their acquired land on the ground that in terms of Circular No. REV (L-B) 10/80 dated 23.02.1980, the allottees are entitled only to one-third share of the total compensation. The respondents feeling aggrieved of the amount of compensation to which they have been held entitled by the Collector sought a reference to the learned District Judge, Udhampur and accordingly, the reference was made by the Collector to the learned District Judge in both the cases.

7. The learned District Judge, Udhampur vide the impugned judgments, after noticing several judgments passed by this Court, has taken a view that the respondents are entitled to full compensation because of the fact that proprietary rights in respect of the acquired lands had been conferred upon them.

8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

9. Mr. S.S. Nanda, Sr. AAG appearing for the appellant-Collector has vehemently argued that the issue to be determined by the learned District Judge, Udhampur was as to whether the compensation assessed by the Collector was as per the prevailing market rate and the scope of reference was limited to this extent but the learned District Judge, Udhampur in both the cases has travelled beyond the scope of reference by dealing with an issue, which was not referred to the Court. He has further contended that the lands, which are the subject matter of the appeals, had admittedly been allotted in favour of the predecessors-in-interest of the respondents in terms of Govt. Order No. LB/7-C of 1958 dated 5th June, 1958 and such type of land falls within the category of land defined i

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 Back to top