Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Compensation Case to High Court for Fresh Adjudication on Cross Objections

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has remanded a land acquisition compensation case to the High Court for fresh adjudication on the cross objections filed by the appellants. The bench comprising of Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Bela M. Trivedi passed the judgment on 4th July 2023.

The case pertained to the acquisition of lands by the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority in Uttar Pradesh. The appellants had challenged the compensation granted for the acquisition of their lands, claiming higher compensation on the grounds of parity to other lands in the vicinity.

The District Judge had initially determined the market value of the lands but deducted a portion for development charges. Both the appellants and the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority had filed appeals in the High Court against this decision. However, the High Court confirmed the compensation as determined by the District Judge.

The appellants contended that their cross objections, filed in the appeal, were not considered by the High Court while passing the judgment. The Supreme Court examined the provisions of Order 41 Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which govern the remedies available to a respondent in the court of first appeal.

Justice Krishna Murari, delivering the judgment, emphasized that cross objections have the same status as a regular appeal and must be considered in full by the court. The High Court was found to have failed in its obligation to apply its mind to all the issues raised, including the cross objections. As a result, the Supreme Court held that the matter should be remanded back to the High Court for fresh adjudication on the grounds raised in the cross objections.

The judgment highlighted the importance of the court of first appeal in recording findings supported by reasons on all the issues raised. It cited relevant precedents to emphasize the duty of the court to consider cross objections and the consequences of failing to do so.

The decision of the Supreme Court grants a renewed opportunity to the appellants to present their case and have their cross objections duly considered by the High Court. The remand for fresh adjudication aims to ensure a fair and comprehensive consideration of all the grounds raised in the appeal.

The Supreme Court’s decision to remand the case to the High Court sets a precedent for the proper consideration of cross objections in land acquisition matters, contributing to the fair and just resolution of disputes in this domain.

Date of Decision: 4th July, 2023

DHEERAJ SINGH    vs GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.   

Latest Legal News