Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M/S TOSHI HOTEL VENTURES PRIVATE LIMITED versus LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ANR

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M/s Toshi Hotel Ventures Private Limited v. Land Acquisition Collector & Anr - CR-2626-2004 [2006] RD-P&H 963 (20 February 2006)

[1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CIVIL REVISION NO. 2626 of 2004

DATE OF DECISION: February 27, 2006

M/s Toshi Hotel Ventures Private Limited .........Petitioner versus

Land Acquisition Collector and another ..........Respondents PRESENT:- Shri Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Madan Gupta, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.

HEMANT GUPTA, J.

The challenge in the present revision petition is to the order passed by the learned Land Acquisition Collector on 3.1.2003 whereby the amount of compensation assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector was ordered to be paid on furnishing of bank guarantee/ surety in the proceedings under section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act").

The conditional order of releasing of payment of compensation was, in fact, based upon the order passed by this Court in appeal arising out of the case against the award under section 18 of the Act.

This Court in CM No. 5767-CII of 2003 in RFA No. 2300 of 2001 titled State of Haryana etc vs. Rattan Singh etc, has since modified the said order and directed that the amount of compensation shall be paid to the [2]

land-owner subject to his furnishing of adequate security to the satisfaction of the executing Court. The Land Acquisition Collector while assessing the compensation cannot impose any condition of payment of compensation on surety or otherwise. The order passed by the learned Land Acquisition Collector is final order determining the amount of compensation on behalf of the State Government and the State Government has no jurisdiction to dispute the said order. Therefore, the condition imposed by the Land Acquisition Collector is wholly illegal and unconstitutional.

Consequently, the said part of the impugned order is set aside.

The amount of compensation would be payable to the land-owners without any condition as imposed by the Land Acquisition Collector.

The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly.

FEBRUARY 27, 2006 ( HEMANT GUPTA )

ks JUDGE


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.