/2022 INSC 0987/
Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS.8331 ­ 8345 OF 2022
NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL 
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY               …Appellant
Versus
RAMESHWAR @ RAMESH CHANDRA SHARMA (DEAD)
THROUGH LEGAL HEIR & ANR.                  …Respondents
J U D G M E N T
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling   aggrieved   and   dissatisfied   with   the   impugned
common   judgment   and   order   dated   18.12.2018   passed   by   the
High   Court   of   Judicature   at   Allahabad   in   respective   First
Appeals No.657 of 2017 and other allied First Appeals by which
after   condoning   the   delay   of   22   years   in   preferring   the
respective   first   appeals,   the   High   Court   has   enhanced   the
amount   of   compensation   for   the   lands   acquired   to   Rs.149   per
1

sq.yard,   the   New   Okhla   Industrial   Development   Authority
(NOIDA) has preferred the present appeals.
2. Learned   counsel   appearing   on   behalf   of   the   appellant
(NOIDA) has vehemently submitted that there was a huge delay
of 22 years in preferring the appeals by the land owners, which
ought not to have been condoned by the High Court.
2.1 In   the   alternative,   it   is   submitted   that   in   any   case   the
acquiring   body   –   NOIDA   shall   not   be   saddled   with   the   liability
to pay the statutory benefits and the interest for 22 years, as it
would   cause   financial   burden   upon   the   NOIDA   and   it   may
affect the project cost.
3. Learned   Counsel   appearing   on   behalf   of   the   land   owners
have  submitted  that  as  such  the   land  owners  shall  be  entitled
to compensation at Rs.297/­ per sq.yard as determined by this
Hon’ble   Court   in   the   case   of   Nanak   (Deceased)   through   LRS.
Vs.   New   OKHLA   Industrial   Development   Authority   and
another   decided   on   26.9.2018   in   Civil   Appeal   No.10013   of
2018 .
2

3.1 It   is   submitted   that   in   any   case   when   it   has   been   found
that   the   land   owners   shall   be   entitled   to   compensation   at
Rs.149/­   per   sq.yard   considering   the   decision   of   this   Hon’ble
Court   in   the   case   of   New   Okhla   Industrial   Development
Authority   (NOIDA)   VS.   Deo   Karan   &   Ors.   decided   on
01.05.2018   in   Civil   Appeal   No.4879   of   2018   and   when   the
same was with respect to the acquisition of the year  1982 and
the land owners are entitled to just compensation, no error has
been   committed   by   the   High   Court   in   entertaining   the
application   for   condoning   the   delay   in   preferring   the   appeals
and awarding the compensation at par with other land owners
whose lands came to be acquired in the year 1982.
4. We   have   heard   learned   counsel   for   the   respective   parties
at length.
5. At the outset, it is required to be noted that in the present
case the Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition
Act,   1894   was   issued   on   05.01.1982.     The   Reference   Court
determined   the   compensation   at   Rs.20/­   per   sq.yard   by
3

impugned   judgment   dated   15.12.1993.     After   a   period   of   22
years the land owners preferred the present appeals before the
High Court.  By the impugned common judgment and order the
High   Court   after   condoning  the   delay   of   22   years  in   preferring
the   appeals   has   enhanced   the   amount   of   compensation   to
Rs.149/­ per sq.yard at par with the land owners in the case of
Deo   Karan   &   Ors. (supra)   by   which   this   Court   with   respect   to
the   acquisition   of   the   year   1982   determined   the   compensation
at Rs.149/­ per sq.yard.  Therefore, in the present case the land
owners   shall   be   entitled   to   compensation   at   Rs.149/­   per
sq.yard   at   par   with   other   land   owners   whose   lands   were
acquired in the year 1982.   It cannot be disputed that the land
owners,   whose   lands   have   been   acquired   under   the   provisions
of Land Acquisition Act, 1984, are entitled to a reasonable and
just compensation at par with the other similarly situated land
owners.
5.1 Now so far as the submission on behalf of the land owners
that   they   shall   be   entitled   to   compensation   at   the   rate   of
Rs.297/­ per sq.yard relying upon the decision of this Court in
4

the   case   of   Nanak   (Deceased)   through   LRS.   (supra)   is
concerned, at the outset it is required to be noted that as such
the   land   owners   have   not   preferred   the   appeals   before   this
Court.   It is the NOIDA who has preferred the present appeals.
Under the circumstances in the appeals preferred by the NOIDA
questioning the determination of the compensation at Rs.149/­
per   sq.yard,   the   land   owners   cannot   be   permitted   to   say   that
they are entitled to the enhanced amount of compensation over
and above Rs.149/­ per sq.yard.  So far as the land owners are
concerned,   the   impugned   judgment   and   order   passed   by   the
High   Court   determining   and/or   awarding   the   compensation   of
Rs.149/­ per sq.yard has attained the finality.
5.2 Even otherwise as rightly observed by the High Court, the
land   owners   are   not   entitled   to   the   compensation   at   Rs.297/­
per sq.yard considering the decision of this Court in the case of
Nanak (Deceased) through LRS.  (supra).  Nothing was pointed
out that how the case of the land owners was comparable with
that   of   the   case   of   Nanak   (Deceased)   through   LRS.   (supra).
On   the   contrary   with   respect   to   the   acquisition   of   the   year
5

1982,   this   Hon’ble   Court   determined   the   compensation   at
Rs.149/­ per sq.yard in the case of  Deo Karan & Ors. (supra).
5.3 However,   at   the   same   time   the   acquiring   body   and   the
beneficiary of acquisition shall not be saddled with the liability
of   statutory   benefits   and   the   interest   which   may   be   available
under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the delayed period.  In
the   present   case   the   delay   of   22   years   can   be   said   to   be   a
substantial   delay.     However,   as   the   claimants   are   held   to   be
entitled   the   enhanced   amount   of   compensation,   in   the   facts
and circumstances of the case, the High Court can be said to be
justified   in   condoning   the   delay.     However,   at   the   same   time,
the   High   Court   has   erred   in   awarding   other   statutory   benefits
and interest for the delayed period.   To saddle with the liability
to   pay   statutory   benefits   and   interest   for   the   delayed   period
upon   the   beneficiary/acquiring   body   would   be   a   financial
burden   upon   the   public   body   and   it   may   increase   the   project
cost   which   shall   be   against   the   public   interests.     It   cannot   be
disputed   that   the   liability   towards   the   statutory   benefits   and
the   interest   under   the   Act,   1984   would   be   a   huge   liability
6

considering   the   interest   at   the   rate   of   15%   per   annum,
solatium,   price   rise   etc.     Therefore,   while   condoning   the   delay
and   enhancing   the   amount   of   compensation   at   par   with   other
land   owners,   the   High   Court   ought   not   to   have   saddled   the
liability   upon   the   appellant   to   pay   statutory   benefits   and   the
interest   payable   under   the   Land   Acquisition   Act,   1894   for   the
delayed period.   To the aforesaid extent the impugned common
judgment and order passed by the High Court is required to be
modified   and   the   present   appeals   are   required   to   be   partly
allowed to the aforesaid extent.
6. In   view   of   the   above   and   for   the   reasons   stated   above   all
these   Appeals   Succeed   in   part.     The   impugned   common
judgment   and   order   passed   by   the   High   Court   passed   in
respective   appeals   is   hereby   partly   allowed   to   the   aforesaid
extent   denying   the   statutory   benefits   and   the   interest   which
may   be   payable   under   the   Land   Acquisition   Act,   1894   for   the
period   between   the   judgment   and   award   passed   by   the
Reference Court i.e. 15.12.1993 till the  respective first appeals
were filed after curing the defects.  Meaning thereby the original
7

land   owners/claimants   shall   not   be   entitled   to   any   statutory
benefits   including   the   interest   payable   under   the   Land
Acquisition   Act,   1894   on   the   enhanced   amount   of
compensation   for   the   period   between   15.12.1993   till   the
respective first appeals after curing the defects were filed.  
Present Appeals are Partly Allowed to the aforesaid extent.
However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall
be no order as to costs.            
     
…………………………..J.
           (M. R. SHAH)
…………………………...J.
          (M.M. SUNDRESH)
New Delhi;
November 17, 2022.
 
8