Disposed

William Antan Dsouza v. the District Collector, Kolhapur and Ors.

Bombay HC7 Jan 2016WP/11828/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge order held that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is a complete code governing compensation, excluding the Maharashtra Resettlement Act, 1976. Remedies for non-payment lie within the 1894 Act, specifically under Section 11, by applying to the Land Acquisition Officer for the release of funds.

What did the court decide?

Granted leave to apply to the Land Acquisition Officer for release of compensation payable under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 within one month.

William Antan Dsouza Vs the District Collector, Kolhapur and… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

(1) (44) WP 11828/15

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Amk

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 11828 OF 2015

¶5

William Antan D'Souza .. Petitioner Vs.

¶6

The District Collector, Kolhapur & Ors.

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

Mr. Gajanan Mahadev Savagave for the Petitioner.

¶9

CORAM : A.S. OKA & C. V. BHADANG, JJ. DATE : 7th JANUARY, 2016.

¶10

P.C.

¶11

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. The prayer

¶12

clause (a) of this petition reads thus:

¶13

(a) Your Lordship may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents forthwith to pay the amount of compensation with interest as per the valuation done by the Executive Engineer, Doodhganga Dharan Department, Doodhganga Nagar, Taluka Radhanagari, District Kolhapur, annexed at Exhibit A to the present Writ Petition and to extend the benefit of the Maharashtra Resettlement of Project Displaced Persons Act, 1976 with other consequential benefits.

¶14

The Writ Petition proceeds on the footing that after the petitioner's land was acquired, there was an award made under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the said Act of 1894). The said Act of 1894 is held to be a complete Code. Therefore, the petitioner will be entitled to receive compensation in terms of the said Act of 1894. Hence, the prayer (a) cannot be granted. For dealing with the grievance of the failure to grant

¶15

(2) (44) WP 11828/15

¶16

compensation or failure to grant adequate compensation, adequate remedies are available under the said Act of 1894.

¶17

If under an award made under Section 11 of the said Act, 1894 compensation is made payable to the petitioner and the same is yet not paid, we permit the petitioner to apply to the concerned Land Acquisition Officer for the release of the amount. If such an application is made, the same shall be decided within a period of one month.

¶18

Subject to what is observed above, the Petition is disposed of.

¶19

(C. V. BHADANG, J.) (A.S. OKA, J.)

William Antan Dsouza v. the District Collector, Kolhapur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

William Antan Dsouza v. the District Collector, Kolhapur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Pundlikrao Godshalwar Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Harishchandra Anant Pandit and Anr. Vs the Commissioner Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Bhagvatiben Panchal and 14 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra through Government Pleader High Court Bombay and 7 Ors.

Vaibhav Tulashiram Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mr. Pradeep Bhagwantrao Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra through Dept of Ministry of Revenue and Forest and Ors.

Mr. Rocky Manvel Nunes Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretr, Nagarvikas Centre and Ors.