Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
With this order this writ petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Judgment
Operative part
Phukan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4. The dispute is regarding the apportionment of compensation in respect of the lan d acquired under the National Highway Act, 1956 belonging to the petitioner and respondent Nos. 5 to 8. The present petition relates to the distribution of the enhanced compensation in respect of Jirat over the acquired land. The grievance of the petitioner is that although he is the brother of respondent Nos. 5 to 8 a nd has got definite shares over the acquired property but he having been sought to be excluded from payment of enhanced compensation has approached this Court f or necessary direction. Mr. Senapati submits that the petitioner is in fact not entitled to get any comp ensation and the dispute having been raised as regards apportionment of compensa tion, the matter is pending before the competent authority for necessary referen ce. Mr. Borah, learned C.G.C. submits that the enhanced compensation has already bee n deposited with the collector. In view of the above fact situation, although Mr. Goswami, appearing for the pet itioner and Mr. Senapati, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 5 to 8, with whom the main dispute rest, agreed that the amount of compensation may be allowed to be disbursed equally amongst the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 as well a s respondent Nos. 5 to 8 upon execution of indemnified bond by each of them, und ertaking to indemnify and returned money so received by him/them in the event an y decision adverse to him/them is taken by the appropriate authority. The statem ents of the learned counsels are reasonable one and accordingly directed that th e amount of enhanced compensation in respect of Jirat for the acquired land whic h is lying deposited with the Collector(K) be distributed equally amongst the pe titioners as well as the respondent Nos. 5 to 8 upon execution of indemnified bo nd by each of them separately, undertaking to indemnify the loss in the event an y of them are not found to be so entitled by the appropriate authority. With this order this writ petition stands disposed of.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With this order this writ petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
National Highway Act, 1956.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.