Supreme CourtDivision Bench

Rudragouda vs Assistant Commissioner And Spl. Land Acquisition Officer

Supreme Court Of India · Decided on 4 January 2017 · Citation: 2017 AIR(SCW) 725 : (2017) 2 AirKarR 154 : AIR 2017 SC 725 : (2017) DNJ 240 : (2017) 12 SCC 743

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arun Mishra, J · Amitava Roy, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 133 · Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 23
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Appeal No. 111 Of 2017
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 218 words
1.

Leave granted.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3.

The question raised in the instant matter is whether the appellant is entitled to interest on the enhanced amount of compensation as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act or as directed by the High Court vide its Orders dated 17.04.2015.

4.

The High Court, while deciding the Review Petition, has observed that the appellant is entitled to interest as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, but since the mistake has been committed by the Court itself, respondents should not be saddled with the payment of interest after 1.10.2013.

5.

In our view, once the High Court came to the conclusion that the appellant is entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation as per the provisions of the Act, the appellant cannot be made to suffer only on the ground that the mistake has been committed by the Court itself.

6.

In Civil Appeal Nos. 9060-9062 of 2014 decided by this Court, the compensation has been enhanced.

7.

Accordingly, the instant Civil Appeal is allowed and it is held that the appellant shall be entitled to interest as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act till its realisation. The impugned order of the High Court is set aside to the aforesaid extent.