9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Compensation awarded for land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act. 2. Interpretation of the Land Acquisition Amendment Act, 1984 regarding solarium entitlement. Analysis: 1. The judgment concerns the compensation awarded for the acquisition of land under the Land Acquisition Act. Initially, the Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation amounts for specific parcels of land. Subsequently, the Civil Judge and the High Court modified these compensation amounts through a reference under section 18 of the Act. The claimant filed an appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation, while the State of Karnataka filed appeals to reduce the compensation. The Supreme Court, comprising REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA & MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI JJ., found no question of principle involved in the appeals and dismissed them. 2. The appeal by the claimant raised the issue of entitlement to a higher solarium under the Land Acquisition Amendment Act, 1984. The claimant argued that the amended Act entitled them to 30% solarium instead of the 15% awarded under the unamended Act. The specific sections of the Amendment Act cited were section 15(b) and section 30(2), which increased the solarium from 15% to 30%. However, the Supreme Court did not agree with the claimant's submission. The Court highlighted the limited retrospectivity intended by Parliament regarding the amended provision, emphasizing that the increased solarium provision applied to awards made after April 30, 1982, and before September 24, 1984. The Court concluded that the amended provision was not intended to apply to all proceedings relating to compensation, regardless of the date of the award. In summary, the Supreme Court dismissed all appeals, emphasizing the limited retrospectivity of the amended provision regarding solarium entitlement under the Land Acquisition Amendment Act, 1984.
|
