Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the enhanced solatium of thirty per cent under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 applied to pending appeals arising from awards made long before the commencement of the amendment.
Analysis: The amended provision in section 23(2), read with section 30(2) of the 1984 Amendment Act, was construed as giving only limited retrospectivity. The amendment was intended to apply to awards made after 30 April 1982 and before 24 September 1984, and to appeals arising from such awards. It was not intended to reopen all older awards merely because an appeal remained pending when the amendment came into force. The reference to the date of introduction of the Bill was treated as controlling the extent of the retrospectivity expressly provided by Parliament.
Conclusion: The claimant was not entitled to enhanced solatium at thirty per cent in respect of the old award, and the request for enlargement of compensation failed.
Final Conclusion: The judgment affirms that the 1984 amendment to solatium operates only within the expressly defined retrospective window and does not extend to antiquated awards merely because appellate proceedings were pending.
Ratio Decidendi: A statutory enhancement of solatium under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 applies only to the class of awards and appellate proceedings expressly covered by the amendment's retrospective clause, and cannot be extended to earlier awards outside that window.