Land Acquisition | HC Can Suo Moto Enhance Compensation Even If No Cross-Appeal Is Filed By Landowners: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that High Court has the suo moto power under Order 41 Rule 33 CPC to enhance the compensation even if the land owners do not filed cross appeal.Relying on a 2010 decision of the Supreme Court in Pralhad and others vs. State of Maharashtra, Justice Sandeep Jain held:“It is apparent that the Apex Court in the case of Pralhad (supra) has considered the issue and has held that in exercise of power under Order 41 Rule 33 CPC, the landowners are entitled to enhanced compensation, even if no appeal or cross objection has been preferred by them.”Applicant applied for review of the Division Bench order of 2014 where appeals by the State under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for reduction of compensation awarded to the landowners was dismissed. The review was filed on grounds that the High Court has Suo moto powers to enhance compensation based on parity even though the applicant had not approached the Court. It was pleaded that the applicant is a rustic villager who was not aware of his legal rights. It was argued that though an observation was made regarding applicant being entitled to compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- per bigha for his land, but did not exercise the power under Order 41 Rule 33 CPC to do so. The Court noted that in a reference, the compensation for the land in the area where applicant's land is, was increased from Rs. 52,800/- per bigha to Rs. 2,20,000/- per bigha. It noted that basis this, the Division Bench observed that applicant was entitled to compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- per bigha but did not award anything to the applicant. In Pralhad and others vs. State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court held that“The provision of Order 41, Rule 33 of CPC is clearly an enabling provision, whereby the Appellate Court is empowered to pass any decree or make any order which ought to have been passed or made, and to pass or make such further or other decree or order as the case may require. Therefore, the power is very wide and in this enabling provision, the crucial words are that the Appellate Court is empowered to pass any Order which ought to have been made as the case may require.”The Court held that the once the Division Bench was of the opinion that the applicant was entitled to higher compensation, it ought to have granted the same. Though the application was filed with a delay of 3141 days, the Court observed“Even this Court is bound to pay the just compensation to the landowner for his acquired land and for adjusting the equity, it will be appropriate that for the period of delay and during which the review application remained defective, the applicant may not be awarded interest on the enhanced compensation awarded by this Court.”Accordingly, the compensation was enhanced to Rs. 2,50,000/- per bigha along with 30% solatium, additional compensation @ 12% per annum and enhanced interest under Section 28, as provided under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Case Title: Satish Chandra Singhal v. State of U.P. and Another 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 208Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AB) 208Counsel For Applicant: Nipun Singh, Senior Advocate assisted by Naman Agarwal and Abhijeet MishraClick Here To Read/Download Order

Land Acquisition | HC Can Suo Moto Enhance Compensation Even If No Cross-Appeal Is Filed By Landowners: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasna Agrawal

Land Acquisition | HC Can Suo Moto Enhance Compensation Even If No Cross-Appeal Is Filed By Landowners: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Upasna Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers