Supreme Court of India

IMPROVEMENT TRUST, SANGRURversusGURJJT SINGH SANDHU AND ORS.

Citation: 1996 INSC 69
Decided: 15 January 1996
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Bench: K RAMASWAMYG B PATTANAIK

Holding

The respondents are not entitled to the additional amount under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Summary

The case concerned an appeal by Improvement Trust, Sangrur against Gurjjt Singh Sandhu and others under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The dispute centered on whether the respondents were entitled to the additional amount provided under Section 23(1A) of the Act, as amended by Act 68 of 1984. The Collector’s award was dated 10 September 1979, while the requisite notification under Section 4(1) had been published on 28 January 1978. The court examined the temporal relationship between the notification and the award and the effect of the 1984 amendment. It held that because the award preceded the amendment and the statutory conditions were not satisfied, the respondents could not claim the additional amount. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed in favour of the appellant, with no costs awarded.

Issues considered

Whether the respondents are entitled to the additional amount under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by Act 68 of 1984

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894s. 23(1A), s. 4(1)

Subjects

Land Acquisition ActSection 23(1A)additional compensationAct 68 of 1984notificationawardentitlement

Judgment

)
!


                       IMPROVEMENT TRUST, SANGRUR                                     A
                                     v.
                       GURJJT SINGH SANDHU AND ORS.

                                 JANUARY 15, 1996

                  [K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.]                              B

           Land Acqui;·ition Act, 1894 :

           S. 23( lA)--Additional amount-Entitlemel!l-Notification and award
    prior to amending Act 68 of 1984-Hence claimants not entitled to additional
    amount.                                                                           c
           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2618 of 1996.

         From the Judgment and Order dated 6.7.93 of the Punjab & Haryana
    High Court in LP.A. No. 9 of 1991.

           S.C. Patel for the Appellant.                                              D
           K.R. Rajesekaran Pillai for the Respondents.

           The following Order of the Court was delivered :

           Leave granted.
                                                                                      E
           Heard learned counsel for the parties.

           Mr. K.R.R. Pillai, learned counsel, is appearing on behalf of respondent
    Nos. 5, 6 and 14 to 18. Notice had been sent on 29.3.1994 to respondent Nos.
    I, 3, 4 and 7 to 13, but till date they have not appeared either in person or
    through their counsel. Acknowledgements have not been received. Therefore,        F
    they must be deemed to have been served. 2nd respondent was served on
    31.3.1994. He is not appearing either in person or through his counsel.

          The controversy is whether the respondents are entitled to the additional
    amount under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended
    by Act 68 of 1984. The Collector's award is dated September 10, 1979 while        G
    the notification under Section 4(1) was published on January 28, 1978. Under
    these circumstances, the respondents are not entitled to the additional amount
    under Section 23(1A) of the Act.

           The appeal is accordingly allowed to the above extent. No costs

    G.N.                                                         Appeal allowed,      H
                                           487

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "Land Acquisition Act"Sign in to search