Inherent Powers U/S 151 CPC Can Be Exercised Post-Award To Prevent Unjust Enrichment In Land Acquisition Cases: J&K&L High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that a court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure even after an award has attained finality, to correct an inadvertent error resulting in excess payment and to prevent unjust enrichment.The Court further held that Section 17-B of the J&K Land Acquisition Act, which provides for recovery of excess amount paid at the acquisition stage, is a statutory embodiment of the doctrine of restitution.“… Section 17-B is a statutory embodiment of the doctrine of restitution under section 144 of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). It reinforces the principle that compensation is not a matter of bounty but of strict legal entitlement, regulated by the scheme of the Act. Any amount paid in excess amount, howsoever occasioned by clerical mistake, or otherwise does not confer any indefeasible right upon the claimant”, the court remarked. The Court was hearing a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging orders passed by the Principal District Judge, Anantnag, which directed recovery of an excess amount of Rs. 2,61,34,972/- along with interest at 6% per annum from a landowner whose land was acquired for the four-laning of the Srinagar-Jammu National Highway.A Single Bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal, while dismissing the petition and upholding the impugned orders, observed that “... the exercise of inherent powers under Section 151 CPC is not barred merely because the main proceedings have culminated, provided such exercise is aimed at preventing abuse of process or securing the ends of justice. The present case does not involve reopening or re-adjudication of the award; rather, it concerns correction of an inadvertent error leading to excess payment.”Background:In the instant matter the petitioner's land along with structures existing thereon, was acquired for the four-laning of the Srinagar-Jammu National Highway at Village Sangam, Bijbehara, District Anantnag. The Reference Court, after framing issues and recording evidence, passed an award granting compensation of Rs. 30 lac per kanal for the land and Rs. 1,02,54,693/- towards structures. The award clearly directed deduction of the amount already received from the total compensation.The award was challenged by respondent No.1 before the High Court which was dismissed. The matter was further carried to the Supreme Court which was dismissed rendering the award final and binding.Thereafter, respondent No.1 filed an application before the Principal District Judge, Anantnag, alleging excess payment. The trial court allowed the application directing recovery of Rs. 2,61,34,972/- along with interest at 6% per annum. A review application filed by the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner then approached the High Court under Article 227.Court's Observation:Adjudicating the matter the court first addressed the maintainability of the application under Section 151 CPC after the award had attained finality and referred to My Palace Mutually Aided Cooperative Society v. B. Mahesh (2022) 19 SCC 806 , which held that inherent powers under Section 151 CPC can be exercised where a party has obtained a decree by fraud or where an order has been passed by a mistake of the court, to rectify such mistake. The Court observed, “.. The inherent powers of the Court are not exhausted upon the conclusion of proceedings; rather they continue to subsist to prevent abuse of its process and to ensure that its orders do not occasion injustice.” The Court held that the trial court's exercise was confined to ensuring that the award is executed in its true spirit and not to reopen or re-adjudicate the award.On the applicability of Section 17-B of the J&K Land Acquisition Act, the Court observed that the provision explicitly mandates that any amount paid under Section 17-A must be taken into account while determining final compensation, and if such payment exceeds the amount ultimately awarded, the excess must be refunded, failing which it becomes recoverable as arrears of land revenue. The Court explained that Section 17-B is a statutory embodiment of the doctrine of restitution under Section 144 of CPC and reinforces the principle that compensation is not a matter of bounty but of strict legal entitlement, regulated by the scheme of the Act. Any amount paid in excess, howsoever occasioned by clerical mistake or otherwise, does not confer any indefeasible right upon the claimant, the bench emphasised. The Court rejected the petitioner's contention that the amount of Rs. 1,02,54,693/- paid towards demolition of structures did not form part of the compensation awarded. The Court held that compensation under land acquisition is not confined merely to the value of the land acquired but extends to all interests therein, including structures and assets attached to such land. The Court further observed that the award had categorically directed that the amount already received by the...

Inherent Powers U/S 151 CPC Can Be Exercised Post-Award To Prevent Unjust Enrichment In Land Acquisition Cases: J&K&L High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags