Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has said that though land-related litigations clog all levels of the courts in the country, denying a land loser access to civil courts would result into injustice in cases of compulsory land acquisitions.

Justice Hrishikesh Roy pointed out that empirical data shows that land disputes clog all levels of courts in India, and according to certain studies, land-related litigations account for the largest set of cases, in terms of both absolute numbers and judicial pendency. 

"For those who are going to lose their land through compulsory acquisition, a key redressal mechanism is to enable them to access courts, at first instance. The aggrieved land loser is often unable to access justice from the judicial system," he said.

"Therefore, having regard to the limited relief that can be obtained from a revenue court under Tenancy Act, 1955, to deny the land losers access to civil court in my opinion, would aggravate the injustice that would otherwise enure, in all cases of compulsory land acquisition," he added.

Justice Roy disagreed with Justice Manoj Misra and upheld the Rajasthan High Court's judgement which declared the land acquisition proceedings null and void.

He held that the appellant Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner failed to establish that they had acquired the land in accordance with the law or paid due compensation to the affected party. The appellant took forceful possession of the respondents’ valuable land by disregarding the legal process and thereby denied the protection of procedural fairness to the respondents, he said.

Justice Misra, in his differing judgment, found that the suit was not maintainable insofar as it related to the land covered by the acquisition notification and also barred by Section 207 read with Section 256 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, and allowed the defendant’s appeal. He set aside the judgment and decree of the high court as well as of the First Appellate Court and restored the decree passed by the Trial Court.

The matter stemmed from a suit instituted by one Gordhan Dass on April 23, 1997 against Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner, Narayan Das, Kanhaiya Lal and Ganesh Ram seeking a permanent prohibitory injunction to restrain the Trust from entering or acquiring the land, measuring three Bighas, in dispute without adopting the due process of law.

Justice Roy approved the high court's judgement which upheld invalidation of the acquisition process, in view of departure from due process.

The bench thus directed the Registry to place the matter before the Chief Justice of India for referring it to the larger bench.

Case Title: Urban Improvement Trust, Bikaner Vs Gordhan Das (D) Through LRs & Ors.