Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

Calcutta High Court Dismisses Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Compensation, Affirms Tribunal's Judgments

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court, comprising Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Sen and Hon’ble Justice Chitta Ranjan Dash, has dismissed a series of appeals filed by Bharat Petroleum challenging the compensation awarded in land acquisition cases. The court affirmed the judgments and decrees passed by the Land Acquisition Tribunal, emphasizing that the appellants were not entitled to notice under Section 8(2) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948.

Delivering the judgment, Hon’ble Justice Partha Sarathi Sen stated, "The appellants have failed to raise objections before the Land Acquisition Collector during the compensation assessment process. As per Section 8(2) of the 1948 Act, the service of notice is restricted to the Collector when objections are raised regarding the amount of compensation. Therefore, the present appellants, being the requiring body, are not entitled to notice in the land acquisition cases."

The appeals revolved around the increase in the value of the acquired land, as determined by the Land Acquisition Tribunal, which the appellants deemed unreasonable. They argued that the tribunal had erred in relying on certain exhibits during the assessment process. However, the court found that the reliance on exhibits was justified as they provided a clear picture of the prevailing land valuation on the day of acquisition.

Furthermore, the court noted that the appellants' reliance on the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was misplaced, as the present cases were governed by the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948. The court distinguished the cited decisions and ruled that the appellants had not obtained the necessary leave from the court before filing the appeals, rendering them defective.

The judgment reaffirms the principle that the Land Acquisition Tribunal's decisions should be respected unless there is a clear error of law or fact. The ruling will have significant implications for land acquisition cases and sets a precedent for the interpretation of the relevant provisions under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948.

The court's decision has also granted the appellants the liberty to withdraw the remaining deposited amount, along with interest, from the office of the Learned Registrar General, High Court at Calcutta. The judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to the legal procedures and obtaining the necessary permissions before filing appeals.

Date of Decision: 13th June 2023

Bharat Petroleum  VS  Md. Sayeedul Islam Mir and Anr.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Bharat-Gas-Vs-Sayeedul-Islam-13June-23-Cal-HC1.pdf"]

Latest Legal News