Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Supreme Court Of India
  4. /
  5. 2009
  6. /
  7. January

Rayeesabegum & Another vs Special Land Acquisition Officer

Supreme Court Of India|30 November, 2009
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Summary

Issue: Payment of enhanced compensation in land acquisition cases
Rule: Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Limitation Act, 1963
Application: Claimants/appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation if they deposit additional court fees within the period of limitation prescribed under the Limitation Act
Conclusion: Claimants/appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation if they deposit additional court fees within the period of limitation prescribed under the Limitation Act, and the respondent, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, is directed to pay the enhanced compensation to the claimants/appellants if they deposit the requisite court fees on the enhanced amount
1. Leave granted.
2. In our view, this appeal needs to be sent to the High Court on remand to consider the appeal afresh on merits. The decision in Bhag Singh & Ors. Vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh through the Land Acquisition Officer, Chandigarh [1985 (3) SCC 737] and Buta Singh Vs.
Union of India [1995 (5) SCC 283] were duly considered in a recent decision of this Court in the case of Chandrashekhar and Ors. Vs. Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer [2009 (9) SCALE 434] on the question of payment of enhanced compensation if additional Court Fees are paid. In that decision, it has 2 been held that the enhanced compensation can be directed to be paid to the claimants/appellants in the event the claimants/appellants deposit the requisite Court Fees on the enhanced amount.
3. Since we are sending this appeal back to the High Court for decision on the aforesaid question relating to the payment of enhanced compensation, if additional Court Fees are paid and also the other questions that may be raised by the parties before the High Court, the High Court is requested to decide the appeal after remand within a period of three months from the date of supply of a copy of this order to it, without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
4. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. There will be no order as to costs.
… J.
[Tarun Chatterjee]
New Delhi; J.
November 30, 2009 [Surinder Singh Nijjar] 2
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Rayeesabegum & Another vs Special Land Acquisition Officer

Court

Supreme Court Of India

JudgmentDate
30 November, 2009
Judges
  • Tarun Chatterjee