2007 (8) TMI 825 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the issue of whether an award passed in Lok Adalat can be considered as an award passed by a Court under Section 3(d) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

Summary:

Issue 1: Jurisdiction of Lok Adalat and interpretation of Section 3(d) of the Land Acquisition Act

The petitioners, owners of lands subject to acquisition for the Upper Krishna Project, did not seek reference for higher compensation initially. However, after a Lok Adalat modified the compensation, they sought re-determination under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act. The Land Acquisition Officer rejected their request, stating the Lok Adalat award is not a reference court award. The Court examined Section 3(d) of the Act, which defines 'Court,' and noted that a Lok Adalat award is considered a decree of a civil court. The judgment emphasized that the Lok Adalat award, being binding and passed with parties' consent, falls under Section 28A, entitling the petitioners to higher compensation.

Key Points:
- Interpretation of Section 3(d) of the Land Acquisition Act regarding the definition of 'Court.'
- Recognition of Lok Adalat award as equivalent to a civil court decree.
- Application of Section 28A to provide higher compensation based on Lok Adalat award.

Decision:
The High Court allowed the writ petitions, setting aside the Land Acquisition Officer's orders and directing re-determination of compensation based on the Lok Adalat award for the acquired lands owned by the petitioners.