1. Land acquisition proceedings — Dispute over whether an award covering only land, excluding superstructures and trees, results in lapse under Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
1995 Supreme(SC) 1334
1996(1) Supreme 48
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.S. Verma & K. Venkataswami, JJ.
The State of Punjab & Ors. -Appellants
versus
Sharan Pal Singh & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 11850-53 of 1995
Decided on 14.12.1995
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
The entire award which is contemplated under Section 11 of the Act by virtue of the prescription in Section 11-A has to be made within the period of two years failing which the entire proceeding shall lapse.
The entire award which is contemplated under Section 11 of the Act by virtue of the prescription in Section 11-A has to be made within the period of two years failing which the entire proceeding shall lapse.
Subject
Land Acquisition - Award and Compensation
Act Referred
Headnote
Land Acquisition Act, 1894- Sections 4(1), 6, 11 and 11-A-State Government issued notices under Section 4(1) and declaration under Section 6 to acquire lands-Respondents challenged award of Land Acquisition Officer contending that award not in conformity with Section 11 of the Act-Award determined compensation for land only and amount of compensation of superstructure and trees standing on land left to be decided separately-High Court holding that award rendered by Land Acquisition Officer not one evisaged under Section 11-Acquisition proceedings would lapse insofar as award relates to that portion of acquired land on which super-structures and trees standing on date of award-Appeals-Impugned award within period specified in Section 11-A must be construed as award under Section 11 in proceedings for acquisition of lands in question- Rights of respondents to claim compensation for buildings/trees left open.
Held : We hold that the impugned award dated 25th March, 1985 within the period specified in Section 11A of the Act must be construed as an award under Section 11 in the proceedings for the acquisition of the lands in question and the contentions to the contrary cannot be sustained. However, we leave open the rights of the respondents to claim compensation for the buildings/trees in accordance with law treating the award already made as one not awarding any compensation for the building/trees. (Para 4)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether an award determining compensation only for land, while deferring compensation for superstructures and trees, constitutes a valid award under Section 11 or causes proceedings to lapse. (Para 2 )
3. An award determining compensation for the entire land area within the statutory period is a valid Section 11 award, regardless of omitted compensation for superstructures. (Para 3 , 4 )
4. An award made within the Section 11A period for the entire land area is construed as a valid award under Section 11, preventing lapse of proceedings. (Para 3 , 4 )
5. Appeals allowed — High Court orders set aside — Respondents' right to claim compensation for buildings and trees preserved. (Para 4 , 5 )
6. Does an award that determines compensation for land but omits compensation for superstructures and trees lead to the lapse of acquisition proceedings under Section 11A?
No. If compensation is determined for the entire land area within the specified period, it is construed as a valid award under Section 11. The proceedings do not lapse, even if compensation for buildings or trees is omitted or deferred. (Para 3 , 4 )
7. What is the remedy for a landowner when a Section 11 award is made for land but fails to award compensation for buildings or trees?
The landowner may claim compensation for the buildings or trees by seeking a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, treating the award as one in which compensation for those specific items was not awarded. (Para 3 , 4 )
JUDGMENT
K.Venkataswami, J.-Leave granted.
By the impugned orders dated
11.10.1990, the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh has held that part of the land acquisition proceedings has lapsed for non-compliance of Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which requires passing of an award within 2 years from the date of declaration under Section 6 of the Act.
2. The appellant, State Government, issued notices under Section 4(1) and declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act on 1.6.1982 and 17.8.1983 respectively to acquire certain lands. Subsequently, an award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 25.3.1985. The respondents challenged the award contending that the award was not in conformity with Section 11 of the Act inasmuch as the award has determined the compensation for the land only and the amount of compensation regarding the superstructure and trees that were standing on such lands was left to be decided separately. The appellant herein (respondent before the High Court) in its written statement took a stand in the following terms :
The award is complete with respect of the land. It was specifically mentioned therein that for the structures and trees the award will be announced separately, because the assessment for the structures and trees standing thereon had not been received from the respective departments.
However, the High Court has accepted the contention advanced on behalf of the respondents herein (petitioners before the High Court) and held as follows :
"The Land Acquisition Collector made the award on March 25, 1985 relating to the land and not for the super-structures and trees standing thereon. The award rendered by the Land Acquisition Collector was not the one envisaged under Section 11 of the Act. The same envisages the award for the Unit, namely, the land, buildings and super-structure and standing crops and trees thereon. The acquisition proceedings would lapse in so far as the award relates to that portion of the acquired land on which the super-structures and trees were standing on the date the award has been made."
3. Aggrieved by the above orders of the High Court the present appeals are filed.
An identical issue came up before this Court in Mohanji & Another v. State of UP & Others1 wherein it was held on 4.8.1995 as follows :-
"A perusal of the award dated 23.9.1986 leaves no doubt that the compensation awarded therein is for the entire land measuring 0.99 acres bearing Plot No. 1311 belonging to the appellants which was acquired in the proceedings. It also appears from the award that the valuation report which had been sought from the Public Works Department had not been received and, therefore, the Land Acquisition Officer contemplated determination of compensation for the building in addition to the compensation awarded for the entire land being make on a subsequent date after the expiry of the specified period of two years under Section 11 of the Act. The question is whether is these circumstances it can be said that no award had been made under Section 11 of the Act in the proceeding to result in lapse of the entire proceeding for the acquisition of the land?
It is no doubt true that the entire award which is contemplated under Section 11 of the Act by virtue of the prescription in Section 11A has to be made within the period of two years failing which the entire proceeding shall lapse. The question is whether it can be said in the present case that no award has been made under Section 11 of the Act in this proceeding ? In our view it cannot be said that no award under Section 11 has been made for the land acquired. Admittedly, compensation has been determined in the award so made for the entire area of 0.99 acres. In view of the fact that no piecemeal award by making a subsequent award after the expiry of the period of two years is contemplated in law, the award dated 23.9.1986 must be construed as the whole award made under Section 11 a
