LawLoveLegal

Introduction — Supreme Court Reaffirms Duty to Ensure “Just Compensation” The Supreme Court of India has reiterated that courts adjudicating land acquisition disputes must not restrict compensation merely to the amount claimed by landowners, if evidence and statutory parameters justify a higher market value. A bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul M. Pancholi held that land acquisition proceedings are not strictly adversarial in nature and that courts have a statutory and equitable duty to determine and award compensation in accordance with law, rather than limiting relief to what the claimant has pleaded. The Court clarified that once the correct market value of land is determined based on statutory factors, restricting compensation to a lower, claimed amount would defeat the mandate of the Land Acquisition Act. Case Background — Karnataka High Court Enhanced Value But Restricted Payable Compensation The dispute arose from land acquired for the Hirehalla Left Bank Canal P...

Supreme Court’s Landmark Decision The Supreme Court of India upheld the Gujarat High Court’s decision permitting the partial demolition of the 400-year-old Mancha Masjid in Ahmedabad to facilitate a road-widening project . The Court emphasized that the move was driven by public interest and not a violation of religious freedom under the Constitution. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi clarified that the main mosque structure will remain intact , with only a portion of the vacant land and platform being affected. The Court further noted that the development plan included similar demolitions of a temple , a commercial building , and a residential house , indicating that the action was not discriminatory or targeted . Religious Rights vs. Property Rights The Supreme Court categorically stated that Article 25 of the Constitution — which guarantees the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion — does not apply in this case. Instead, the dispute...