Land Acquisition Appeal and Dismissal for Default

Legal Principle

The prevailing legal principle established in various judgments is that a reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act cannot be dismissed for default due to the non-appearance of the claimant. The courts are obligated to decide the reference on its merits, irrespective of the participation of the parties involved.

Key Findings

1. Obligation to Decide on Merits:

2. The court must pass an award in response to a reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Dismissing the reference for default is inconsistent with the provisions of the Act, as it effectively leaves the reference unanswered Shekar S. Sheth VS Executive Engineer, Works Division - Vii (nh) - Bombay (2022)Yadvinder Sharma VS State of H. P. - Himachal Pradesh (2011).

3. Supreme Court Rulings:

4. In Chimanlal Hargovinddas vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, the Supreme Court emphasized that the award by the Land Acquisition Officer is merely an offer, and the court must determine the market value afresh based on the materials presented before it. The court cannot dismiss the reference for default Shekar S. Sheth VS Executive Engineer, Works Division - Vii (nh) - Bombay (2022)Yadvinder Sharma VS State of H. P. - Himachal Pradesh (2011).

5. Restoration of References:

6. Courts have consistently held that if a reference is dismissed for default, it can be restored, as the dismissal does not align with the statutory requirements of the Land Acquisition Act. The court is required to make an award even in the absence of evidence from the claimant Vithoba Kondiba Lokara VS State Of Maharashtra - Bombay (2023)KRISHNA PILLAI VS STATE OF KERALA - Kerala (1988).

7. Natural Justice:

8. The principle of natural justice dictates that parties should not be condemned unheard. Therefore, the court must ensure that all parties have the opportunity to present their case before making a decision Hari Baboo VS Suresh Baboo - Allahabad (2014)THAKUR DASS VS LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR - Himachal Pradesh (2002).

Conclusion

Based on the established legal principles, it is clear that a land acquisition appeal made on reference cannot be dismissed in default by the High Court. The court is mandated to address the reference on its merits, ensuring that the rights of the claimants are upheld. If a reference is dismissed for default, it should be restored, allowing the court to pass an award based on the evidence available, regardless of the claimant''s participation.

Recommendations

• Ensure that all parties are notified and given a fair opportunity to present their evidence in land acquisition cases.
• If faced with a dismissal for default, consider filing for restoration based on the legal precedents that support the obligation of the court to decide on merits.

References: Shekar S. Sheth VS Executive Engineer, Works Division - Vii (nh) - Bombay (2022)Vithoba Kondiba Lokara VS State Of Maharashtra - Bombay (2023)KRISHNA PILLAI VS STATE OF KERALA - Kerala (1988)Yadvinder Sharma VS State of H. P. - Himachal Pradesh (2011)Hari Baboo VS Suresh Baboo - Allahabad (2014)THAKUR DASS VS LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR - Himachal Pradesh (2002).].