UNION OF INDIAversusB.V. SAROJA AND ANR.
- Citation
- 1995 INSC 37
- Decided
- 13 January 1995
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
- Bench
- K RAMASWAMYA S ANAND
Holding
The amendment under Section 23(1‑A) cannot be applied retrospectively, so the respondents are not entitled to the additional amount.
Summary
The Union of India acquired land belonging to B.V. Saroja and another person under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquisition notification was issued on 30 March 1972, the award was made on 15 September 1976 and possession taken on 15 October 1976. After the award, the respondents claimed an additional amount under Section 23(1‑A) of the Land Acquisition Act as amended by Amendment Act 68/84. The Supreme Court examined whether the amendment could be applied to awards made before its enactment, relying on the Constitution Bench decision in K.S. Paripoorn v. State of Kerala (1994). The Court held that the amendment could not be invoked retrospectively and therefore the respondents were not entitled to the additional payment. Consequently, the review petition was allowed and the appeal was dismissed in favour of the Union of India.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondents are entitled to additional compensation under Section 23(1‑A) of the Land Acquisition Act, as amended by Amendment Act 68/84, for an award made in 1976
- Whether the amendment can be applied retrospectively to awards dated before its enactment
Legislation cited
- Amendment Act 68/84
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894s. 23(1-A), s. 4(1)
Subjects
Judgment
(
~
A UNION OF INDIA
v. )/., ......
B.V. SAROJA AND ANR.
JANUARY 13, 1995
~
B [K. RAMASWAMY AND DR. A.S. ANAND, JJ.]
Land Acquisition Act, 1894-Amendment Act 68184-Section 23(1-A)
-No entitlement to payment of additional amount.
C. Practice and Procedure-Review allowed in view of the Constitution
Bench judgment.
After publication of the award in 1976, upon notification u/s. 4(1) of
the Land Acquisition Act the respondents sought payment of additional
amount upder Section 23(1-A) of the Amendment Act 68/84.
D
Allowing the appeal, this Court -< -
HELD : The respondents are not entitled to the payment of the
additional amount as contemplated under Section 23(1-A) of Land Ac·
quisition Act as amended by Amendment Act 68/84 in view of the Constitu·
E tion Bench judgment. [251 ·C)
KS. Paripooran v. State of Kerala, [1994) 5 SCC 593, applied.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Review Petition No. 41 of
1993. y •
F
IN
Civil Appeal No. 887 of 1995.
G From the Judgment and Order dated 15.9.89 of the Karnataka High
Court in M.F.A. No. 2814 of 1985.
~
AS. Nambiar, Ms. B. Sunita Rao, Ms. Sushma Suri and Ms. Anil
Katiyar for the Petitioner/Appellant.
H P. Mahale for the Respondents.
250
U.0.1. v. B.V. SAROJA 251
The following Order of the Court was delivered : A
The notification under Sectioin 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was
published on March 30, 1972. The award was made by the Land Acquisi-
tion Collector on September 15, 1976 and the possession was taken on
October 15, 1976. The point raised now is covered by the judgment of the
Constitution Bench in KS. Palipooman v. State of Kera/a, reported in B
(1994] 5 SCC 593. In view of these facts, the respondents are not entitled
to the payment of the additional amount as contemplated under section
23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act as amended by Amendment Act
68/84. As a consequence, the claimants are not entitled to the above
benefit. The Review Petition is ordered.
c
Leave granted in S.L.P. The appeal is allowed only to the above
extent. The award of the Courts below are accordingly modified. No costs.
A.G. Appeal allowed.
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.