+917604047601
Introduction
The recent judgement of the Supreme Court of India has further strengthened the lawful compensation for the acquired land, the case dealing with the delayed compensation. The Court also held that landowners have a right to current market price for the acquired land in the event that the government is slow to release compensation amounts. This decision affirms the constitutional provision on property under Article 300A of the Constitution and the human right to equal and fair compensation in a welfare state.
The property and civil lawyers are highly relevant to ensure an appropriate approach to the matters of such cases.
Background
This case was as a result of land acquisitions made in the year 2003 for the International Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP) under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act. The affected landowners had not been compensated even though the acquisition had occurred almost two decades before the research was carried out, thus seeking judicial redress. This case has implications to the larger question concerning the embrace of bureaucratic procedures that has resulted in slowed down acquisition processes for land and dwindling justice for those who lost their property.
Laws Discussed
Article 300A
Article 300A of the Indian Constitution protects the right to property as a constitutional as well as human right. It declares that nobody shall be prohibited from acquiring, selling or using property without authorization of the law. According to this case, the Court stated that delayed compensation contradicts this provision. The failure of the landowners to receive rightful compensation for 18 years was an infringement of their constitutional rights. This ruling re-emphasizes the constitutional responsibility of the state to protect property rights and fairly and quickly pay owners of acquired property.
Article 142
Article 142 is within the Court’s procedural law to make any order or decree that will fully address any issue in a lawful case. The Court used this power to order compensation based on market value prevalent at the date of the judgment April 22, 2019. This proves that the Court remains ready to address prejudice that arises from compensation delay and correct the fairness of landowners.
The judgment also used the provisions under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (LA Act) to advance the idea of a timely and appropriate compensation in acquisition cases.
Name of the Case and Court & Bench
Case: Bernanard Farncis Joseph Vaz and Others vs. Government of Karnataka and Others
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan
Facts
- Originally constructions in the BMICP project were initiated in the year 2003 in which the Karnataka government purchased the lands.
- None of the landowners received compensation even if 18 years had elapsed.
- In 2019, a Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) changed the date that the market value is to be determined to 2009 on legal grounds.
- State authorities did not agree with such a decision and demanded compensation according to the market prices in 2003.
- Owners demanded to be paid the present market price for the land pointing to inflation and loss of purchasing power.
Issues
- Should compensation be tied to the market price of the land of April 2003 or any other later date?
- Whether the compensation has been delayed it violates the constitutional right to property as enshrined in Article 300A?
- What should be done concerning the decline in purchasing power in the long run?
Judgment and Rationale
Accordingly, the Supreme Court concluded that awarding compensation at the market values of 2003 would cause a “travesty of justice.” It ordered that compensation should be fixed based on its value on April 22, 2019 to avoid any injustice on the part of the landowners. The Court reasoned that:
Inflation and Decline in Purchasing Power: In total, compensation has to reflect the current state of economic outlook, as the value of money changes over the years.
Right to Property: Landowners must not be denied fair compensation because it is a constitutional and human right.
Timely Disbursal: Failure to compensate promptly is inconsequential to justice and is anathema to the principles of the welfare state.
The decision made by the Court under Article 142 brings focus back to justice and fair methods of compensation.
Seeking a property lawyer in such circumstances is important to ensure that you can know your position in regard to the property and how best to go about making the rightful compensation claims.
Future Implications
This judgment contains a lot of guidance for future land acquisition cases. Key takeaways include:
Strengthening Landowners' Rights: The decision focuses on the obligation of the state authorities in the timely and proper compensation determination.
Inflation Adjustments: Courts can also start appealing to inflation rates and purchasing power when in similar cases.
Improved Legal Frameworks: The decision underscores the importance of policy and practice adjustments to bring efficiencies to land procurement and compensation practices.
A civil lawyer helps in tricky processes and shields you during land acquisition cases because their speciality involves civil law.
Critical Analysis
This judgment while quite meritorious reflects systemic deficiencies in the manner in which land acquisition procedures are conducted. In addition to constituting a violation of the rights of landowners, constant delays also demonstrate poor governance. However, the Court’s emphasis on its extraordinary powers following Article 142 is clear: existing legislative measures are inadequate to resolve such issues coherently.
Consulting professional property and civil lawyers as early as possible is proactive in minimizing the time more so when a landowner is facing legal issues.
Conclusion
This ruling can be considered as the breakthrough in the Supreme Court for safeguarding landowners rights and justice in the matter of compensation. It reemphasizes the notion that justice delayed can never be justice denied. Relating to this judgment, there is a need for system reforms to discourage such long and tiresome legal processes as well as protect the rights of persons affected by land acquisition.
To the land owners and lessees, legal advice from property lawyers is beneficial so as to enable them to fully protect their legal rights.
Civil lawyers are capable of offering the best advice on how to tackle problems and demand an appropriate reward.
FAQs
What should I do if the government takes a long time to compensate me for the acquired land?
You should consult the property lawyer to know your side of the law and apply for fair compensation through the court.
What market value is used in determining the amount of the property to be paid for the acquired land?
The market value is usually calculated in accordance with the date of announcing the acquisition. Nonetheless, the current market value can be relied on where the compensation of the loss is unduly deferred.
Is it possible to object to the sum of money which the government offers?
Yes, the compensation amount can be negotiated if it is deemed lower than the current market rates or does not consider factors such as inflation. As well as a civil lawyer can help you to build your case properly.
What claims does Article 300A accord me when the state seeks to acquire my land?
Article 300A of the Constitution protects your property and no person or authority shall take or deprive anyone of his/her property. This right is violated by delayed or unfair compensation, and you can go to court over the matter.
In what way is seeking legal advice necessary when it comes to land acquisitions?
Legal consultants are in a position to explain various procedures, to file various petitions and make sure that you receive your rightful share under the law.
It is wise to seek the services of a property lawyer as well a civil lawyer in cases of land acquisition and ensure you get adequate compensation.
Share on
×