Land Acquisition | Delay In Filing Appeal No Reason To Deny Land Losers Fair Compensation : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that a delay in filing an appeal against a land acquisition compensation award would not be a reason to deny just, fair, and reasonable compensation to the landowners.

“Delay is not a reason to deny the land losers their compensation, which is just, fair and reasonable for the land they have lost.”, the court observed.

The bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Manmohan was hearing the case where the Appellant had filed an appeal after a delay of 4908 days (13.5 years) before the High Court seeking higher compensation than the compensation determined by the Reference Court. However, the High Court refused to condone the delay, and dismissed the appeal.

Aggrieved by the High Court's decision, the Appellant approached the Supreme Court.

Setting aside the High Court's decision, the Court noted that the High Court committed an error in refusing to condone the delay, despite there being a consistent line of precedents favouring liberal condonation in land acquisition matters.

The Court's reasoning was based on the constitutional principle enshrined under Article 300A of the Constitution, which grants right to property as a constitutional right to a citizen and calls for fair, just, and reasonable compensation to the person who was deprived of the property as part of the state's exercise of its power of eminent domain.

However, the Court clarified that though the person deprived of the land is entitled to seek compensation, no interest can be granted for the period of delay that occurred in filing a claim for appropriate compensation.

Reference was drawn to the case of Huchanagouda v. Assistant Commissioner and Land Acquisition Officer & Anr., (2020) 19 SCC 234, where the Court taking into account the poverty and illiteracy of the land loser, condoned the delay of more than 2000 days. However, observed that equities had to be balanced by ensuring that the determination of market value relates back to the preliminary notification - making sure that there is no prejudice to the acquiring authorities, as also no undue advantage to the land loser. In other words, the appellants who approached the Court with delay, would not be granted interest for such period.

“In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that the delay ought to have been condoned, since the position that the land loser had, in fact, asked for the appeal to be filed but it was not, for no fault of his, is an uncontroverted position of fact. Consequently, the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment and orders are set aside and the matters are remanded to the High Court for consideration afresh, on all aspects, save and except delay. Such consideration is to be made, uninfluenced by the observations made hereinabove. However, for the delayed period that is being condoned, the appellant shall not be entitled to any interest.”, the court observed.

Resultantly, the appeal was allowed.

Case Title: SURESH KUMAR VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 473

Click here to read the judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Jay Kishor Singh, AOR

For Respondent(s) Mr. Samar Vijay Singh, AOR Ms. Sabarni Som, Adv. Mr. Amit Ojha, Adv. Mr. Aman Dev Sharma, Adv. Mr. Fateh Singh, Adv. Mr. Keshav Mittal, Adv. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, AOR