Gurbaksh Rai Wadhawan Vs. State of Haryana & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 1555 of 1987
Petitioner: Gurbaksh Rai Wadhawan
Respondent: State of Haryana & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 1555 of 1987
Judges: E.S. VENKATARAMIAH & K.N. SINGH, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Feb 16, 1988
Head Note:
LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
Determination of compensation payable – Issues regarding value of the trees standing on the acquired land and entitlement to compensation on account of severance of land not considered by the Land Acquisition Court and the High Court – Matter remanded to the Land Acquisition Court for fresh disposal.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
It is not disputed that neither the Land Acquisition Court (Additional District Judge, Sonepat) nor the High Court has recorded findings on issues 3 and 4 viz. “(3) what was the value of the trees standing on the acquired land? and (4) whether the claimant is entitled to any compensation on account of severance of land, if so, how much?” Before the determination of the total compensation payable to the claimant, it was necessary for the Land Acquisition Court to record evidence on these two issues also. The Land Acquisition Court having failed to record its findings on issues 3 and 4 the determination of the total compensation payable to the appellant has become defective. It is also alleged that there are also conflicting awards regarding the value of the land in the vicinity. We, therefore, set aside the judgment of the Land Acquisition Court and of the High Court and remand this case to the Land Acquisition Court (Additional District Judge, Sonepat) for fresh disposal in accordance with law. It is open to the Land Acquisition Court to determine the value of the land also afresh. Parties may be permitted to adduce additional evidence if they are so advised. The Land Acquisition Court shall conclude the proceedings within four months from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. There is no order as to costs.
It is not disputed that neither the Land Acquisition Court (Additional District Judge, Sonepat) nor the High Court has recorded findings on issues 3 and 4 viz. “(3) what was the value of the trees standing on the acquired land? and (4) whether the claimant is entitled to any compensation on account of severance of land, if so, how much?” Before the determination of the total compensation payable to the claimant, it was necessary for the Land Acquisition Court to record evidence on these two issues also. The Land Acquisition Court having failed to record its findings on issues 3 and 4 the determination of the total compensation payable to the appellant has become defective. It is also alleged that there are also conflicting awards regarding the value of the land in the vicinity. We, therefore, set aside the judgment of the Land Acquisition Court and of the High Court and remand this case to the Land Acquisition Court (Additional District Judge, Sonepat) for fresh disposal in accordance with law. It is open to the Land Acquisition Court to determine the value of the land also afresh. Parties may be permitted to adduce additional evidence if they are so advised. The Land Acquisition Court shall conclude the proceedings within four months from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. There is no order as to costs.
