The Supreme Court, in a landmark judgment has stated that, it has held that if under the 1894 act, reimbursement for land acquired has not been paid to the land owner or deposited with a relevant court and retained in the treasury, then what will happen is that the acquirement will be considered to have failed. Moreover, it will be covered under the 2013 law which entitles the landowners to higher compensation.
The only solace under this law is that granting the reimbursement must be five years or more before the enactment of Land Acquisition Bill for easy adequate Transparency, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Again the Right (Equitable) to Fair Compensation (Remuneration) or Reimbursement law was intimated on Jan 1, 2014.
Read more on Newly amended Land Bill for Future
What was stated by the bench of Justice R.M.Lodha, Justice Madan B. Lokur and Justice Kurian Joseph in their fresh conclusion in the judgment is that the paying recompense amount to government or depositing in government treasury is of no use. Moreover, it can’t be held to be on the same par with the compensation remunerated to the persons/ landowners interested.
The court has stated that while answering the question what the “true meaning” is of the expression: "compensation has not been paid" appearing in Section 24(2) of the 2013 act.
The court has also stated that the 1894 Land Acquisition Act being "an expropriator legislation needs to be adhered to strictly. The whole mode, manner and procedure for payment of compensation are suggested in Part V (sections 31-34) of the 1894 Act. Moreover, what happens with the collector is that he acts with respect to the payment of compensation.
The court also ruled out stating that under a settled proposition of law, when power is entrusted to execute a particular thing in a assertive approach, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. The court while rejecting the appeal by Pune Municipal Corporation defying the Bombay High Court judgment, by which it has extinguish the possession of 43.94 acres for development of a Forest Garden, stated that the other rules of performance were necessarily ruled out.
On Jan 31, 2008, the award for the remuneration for possess these lands was made. Moreover, to land owners, notices were issued to obtain the compensation. However, they didn’t get the compensation, the amount (27 crore) was deposited in the government treasury.
The only solace under this law is that granting the reimbursement must be five years or more before the enactment of Land Acquisition Bill for easy adequate Transparency, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Again the Right (Equitable) to Fair Compensation (Remuneration) or Reimbursement law was intimated on Jan 1, 2014.
Read more on Newly amended Land Bill for Future
What was stated by the bench of Justice R.M.Lodha, Justice Madan B. Lokur and Justice Kurian Joseph in their fresh conclusion in the judgment is that the paying recompense amount to government or depositing in government treasury is of no use. Moreover, it can’t be held to be on the same par with the compensation remunerated to the persons/ landowners interested.
The court has stated that while answering the question what the “true meaning” is of the expression: "compensation has not been paid" appearing in Section 24(2) of the 2013 act.
The court has also stated that the 1894 Land Acquisition Act being "an expropriator legislation needs to be adhered to strictly. The whole mode, manner and procedure for payment of compensation are suggested in Part V (sections 31-34) of the 1894 Act. Moreover, what happens with the collector is that he acts with respect to the payment of compensation.
The court also ruled out stating that under a settled proposition of law, when power is entrusted to execute a particular thing in a assertive approach, the thing must be done in that way or not at all. The court while rejecting the appeal by Pune Municipal Corporation defying the Bombay High Court judgment, by which it has extinguish the possession of 43.94 acres for development of a Forest Garden, stated that the other rules of performance were necessarily ruled out.
On Jan 31, 2008, the award for the remuneration for possess these lands was made. Moreover, to land owners, notices were issued to obtain the compensation. However, they didn’t get the compensation, the amount (27 crore) was deposited in the government treasury.
For more articles on real estate business India go through Consumer Property forum Ratings official website.
No comments:
Post a Comment