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

2013 Supreme(All) 2795

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : ASHOK BHUSHAN AND B. AMIT STHALEKAR, JJ.
FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ....Appellants
Versus
KAILASH CHAND AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(First Appeal Nos. 62, 63, 64, 1062, 1063 of 1999 and 116 of 2000, 81 and 82 of 1996, decided on 12th December, 2013)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Prabodh Gaur, N.P. Singh, V.B. Upadhyay for the Appellant; K.R. Sirohi, V.K.S. Chaudhary, Ashok Tripathi, Smt. Sunita Agarwal and Dilip Gupta for the Respondents.

Headnote:Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Sections 54, 18, 4 and 6—Transfer of Property Act, 1882—Section 6(e)—Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order XXII, Rule 10—Land acqusition—Compensation—Right to receive compensation—Transfer of—Scope—Whether transfer of right to receive compensation in pending Land Acquisition References is impermissible by virtue of Section 6(e) of Transfer of Property Act, 1882—Whether a transferee who obtained transfer during the pendency of Land Acquisition References could have prosecuted the Land Acquisition References and are entitled to receive compensation—Right to receive compensation covers both the stages i.e. right to receive compensation as awarded by Special Land Acquisition Officer and if determination is disputed, to receive compensation as determined by Civil Court on a reference under Section 18—Transfer made by owners during the pendency of reference under Section 18 was transfer of their rights to receive compensation at the correct market value of the property—Transfers made in favour of respondents during the pendency of land acquisition reference not hit by Section 6(e) of T.P. Act—Transfer of right to receive compensation consequent to reference proceedings was a right in a property—Respondents clearly entitled for benefits of Reference Court Order—Certified copy of sale-deeds admissible in evidence and were taken into consideration while deciding the reference—Determination of market value of land as Rs. 200 per square yard found based on materials on record—No ground made to interfere with the impugned judgments of Reference Court. [Paras 34 to 47]

       Result; Appeals Dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ashok Bhushan, J.—All these appeals have been filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against two judgment and orders of the Additional District Judge/District Judge Bulandshahr in Land Acquisition References. The First six appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 14.9.1998 of III Additional District Judge Bulandshahr deciding Land Acquisition Reference No. 205 of 1989, Land Acquisition Reference No. 234 of 1989 and Land Acquisition Reference No. 235 of 1989. The last two appeals have been filed against the judgment and orders dated 6.11.1995 of District Judge, Bulandshahr deciding Land Acquisition Reference No. 213 of 1989 and Land Acquisition Reference No. 239 of 1989. All these appeals have arisen from the judgment and orders rendered by reference Court in reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act arising out of the same notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. For deciding all these appeals, it shall be sufficient to refer the facts and materials on record in First Appeal No. 62 of 1999, which is being treated as leading appeal. Certain facts of first appeal No. 81 of 1996 are also to be noted.

2. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 21.1.1970 was issued for acquisition of land situate at Qasba Baran, Tahsil and district Bulandshahr. An area of 16 Bighas, 10 Biswas and 16 Biswansis was proposed to be acquired for construction of godown and sheds by the Food Corporation of India. Declaration under Section 6 was issued on 4.6.1971. The possession of land was taken on 27.2.1982 and the award by Special Land Acquisition Officer was given on 3.12.1985. The land was situated within the municipal area of Bulandshahr. Special Land Acquisition Officer gave an award of Rs. 64,467.22 per Pakka Bigha for the land (Jungle Awwal Aabi), and an award of Rs. 41,791.04 per Pakka Bigha for the land (Jungle Awwal Khaki). Bhagwat Prasad and Har Prasad, sons of Kale Singh were Bhumidhars of plot No. 618, area 2 Bighas, 19 Biswas and plot No. 620 area 10 Biswas. The original tenure holder accepted the compensation under protest and submitted an application before the Special Land Acquisition Officer for making a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of the compensation. The original tenure holder claimed compensation at the rate of Rs. 300/- per square yard with solatium and interest. After reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, Bhagwat Prasad died on 1.11.1989 and in reference No. 205 of 1985 his widow Smt. Kundaniya was substituted. Smt. Kundaniya widow of Bhagwat Prasad transferred her right of receiving compensation on 29.5.1997 in favour of Kailash Chand son of Ramji Lal. The deed noted that for enhancement of compensation Land Acquisition Reference No. 205 of 1989 is pending in the Court of Additional District Judge and disposal of which is likely to take sufficiently long time and she being in need of money is transferring all her rights to receive compensation or any other amount in favour of Kailash Chand. Similarly Har Prasad also transferred his right to receive compensation and any other amount towards acquisition of Plot Nos. 618 and 620 in favour of Akhtar Husain. On the basis of above registered deeds, the names of Kailash Chand and Akhtar Husain were substituted in the Land Acquisition Reference No. 205 of 1989 and by order dated 7.8.1998, passed by the Additional District Judge under Order 22 Rule 10 C.P.C. the application filed on behalf of Akhtar Husain and Kailash Chand was allowed on 7.8.1998.

3. Before the reference Court both the parties led oral as well as documentary evidences in support of their respective claims. In Land Acquisition Reference Nos. 205, 234 and 235, the claimants relied on earlier judgements of the reference Court dated 19.5.1992 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 256 of 1987, judgment dated 31.5.1994 in Land Acquisition Reference No



















































































































































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