Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA versus MARUTI LAXMAN

Supreme Court Cases

1996 SCC (4) 595 JT 1996 (5) 73 1996 SCALE (4)298

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


STATE OF MAHARASHTRA V. MARUTI LAXMAN [1996] RD-SC 545 (15 April 1996)

RAMASWAMY, K.

RAMASWAMY, K.

G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION: 1996 SCC (4) 595 JT 1996 (5) 73 1996 SCALE (4)298

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

O R D E R Though notice was served on the respondent, no one appears on behalf of him.

Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

Notification under Section 4 [1] of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [for short, the 'Act'] was published on July 31, 1969. The Land Acquisition officer made his award on October 12, 1972 awarding compensation @ Rs.

1,000/- per acre. On reference, the civil Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.2,000/- per acre by award and decree dated February 18, 1977. The High Court while dismissing the State appeal on July 16, 1986 has awarded the enhanced benefits under the Amendment Act 68 of 1984. Thus this appeal by special leave.

This appeal is only in respect of awarding of enhanced benefits under Sections 23 [2], 28 end 23 [1A] of the Act.

In view of the settled legal position that the award of the civil Court was made long before the date of the introduction of the Amendment Act 68 of 1984, the claimant is not entitled to the enhanced benefits. That apart, it is also settled legal position that the High Court, while dismissing the appellant's appeal, had no jurisdiction to award the additional benefits since the claimants did not file any appeal for further enhancement. Therefore, in the absence of award additional compensation being awarded, the High Court has no jurisdiction to award the benefits under the provisions Of the Amendment Act 68 of 1984.

The appeal is accordingly allowed. The order of the High Court awarding solatium, interest and additional amount under Section 23 [2], 28 and 23 [1-A] stands set aside. No costs.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.