Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Sets Aside Interim Compensation of Rs. 2 Crores Imposed on Jaipur Development Authority for STP Non-compliance”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set aside the imposition of an interim compensation of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees two crores) on the Jaipur Development Authority by the National Green Tribunal. The case stemmed from a finding that the sewage treatment plant (STP) operated by the appellant had been non-compliant for 135 days. The appellant did not dispute this finding but challenged the substantial amount of the imposed compensation.

The Court observed, “After having perused paragraph No.8 of the impugned judgment, we find that there is absolutely no reason recorded by the Tribunal for coming to the conclusion that the appellant is liable to pay a sum of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- towards the interim compensation.” The Court noted that the Tribunal did not provide reasons for rejecting the Committee of Experts’ proposed compensation of Rs. 33,75,000/- (Rupees thirty three lakhs seventy five thousand), which the appellant had already deposited.

Given the lack of recorded reasons for the imposition of the higher compensation amount, the Supreme Court has decided to remand the case back to the National Green Tribunal for a fresh reconsideration of the quantum of interim compensation. The Court emphasized that the Tribunal must hear the parties and decide on the interim compensation issue afresh. Until a new determination is made, the appellant’s deposited amount of Rs. 33,75,000/- shall be treated as interim compensation.

The appeal has been partly allowed by the Supreme Court, which has also urged the Tribunal to expedite the resolution of the interim compensation matter. This decision highlights the importance of providing proper reasoning for the imposition of compensation amounts and ensures a fair assessment of penalties in cases of non-compliance with environmental regulations.

Date of Decision: August 09, 2023.

JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Jaipur_Development_Authority_vs_The_State_Of_Rajasthan_on_9_August_2023.pdf"]

Latest Legal News