Supreme Court Clarifies Procedure in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute.


26 September 2025 Land Acquistion >> Property & Real Estate  

The Supreme Court of India has disposed of a set of appeals arising out of a family dispute over compensation for land acquired nearly two decades ago under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The controversy stemmed from rival claims among the sons of late Kerba Babaji Kadam, whose lands at Village Jalkot in Osmanabad district, Maharashtra, were acquired, leading to proceedings for enhancement of compensation.

An order for award was made for the acquisition on 21 January 2004. Later, Kerba Kadam approached the higher compensation under Section 18 of the Act of 1894. He, however, died on 17 January 2008, and his sons fought over who would represent his interest in the outstanding reference proceedings.


 

 
 
 

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, had previously granted the request of two of the heirs under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for them to be impleaded as parties in the Section 18 reference. The High Court had revoked the civil court order rejecting their impleadment and made it clear that the claims could be dealt with later under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, which addresses disputes in regard to entitlement or apportionment of compensation. The review petition of another son, Raosaheb Kerba Kadam, was rejected in February 2024 as well.


Raosaheb filed aggrievement before the Supreme Court. The bench, which included Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Alok Aradhe, on hearing the case, observed that the only surviving Section 18 reference regarding the relevant land is against the appellant. The Court also made an observation that whether the person is entitled to receive the higher compensation and in what ratio is not within the scope of the Section 18 proceedings. Rather, such queries would have to be decided under Section 30 of the 1894 Act, which allows resolution of apportionment and title disputes.

Clarifying this legal stance, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and made it clear that, on disposal of the reference application, the Reference Court is required to refer the question of entitlement and apportionment to Section 30 proceedings. All pending applications stood closed in view of the judgment.


LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894