https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285163 Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was treated as conferring a substantive right operating prospectively, and the expression "award" was read as referring to the award made by the Collector or the Reference Court, depending on context. The benefit under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 was not denied merely because the Collector had earlier made an award; where the Reference Court's award was made after the amendment came into force, the claimant remained entitled to the additional amount. The earlier contrary view was not accepted to that extent, and the Union's challenge failed. en-us Fri, 22 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Dec 2019 12:22:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285163 Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was treated as conferring a substantive right operating prospectively, and the expression "award" was read as referring to the award made by the Collector or the Reference Court, depending on context. The benefit under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 was not denied merely because the Collector had earlier made an award; where the Reference Court's award was made after the amendment came into force, the claimant remained entitled to the additional amount. The earlier contrary view was not accepted to that extent, and the Union's challenge failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285163