Case at a Glance
A house acquired for four-laning of the Nerchowk–Manali section of NH-21 in Kullu district was valued at ₹66.66 lakh in a 2018 supplementary award that recorded the petitioner as its builder. The amount was kept in a fixed deposit for years because a Gurdwara committee claimed the land. The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that compensation for a structure must go to the person who established an interest in it, that a land dispute with no claim about the structure is no proof of entitlement, and ordered release of the amount with interest within about three weeks.
In 2017 the Competent Authority began acquisition for four-laning of the Nerchowk–Manali section of NH-21 at Mohal Shilihar, Tehsil Bhuntar, District Kullu. The petitioner’s house was identified as Structure No. 35. Supplementary Award No. 113/4 dated 22 May 2018 fixed ₹66,66,000 for the structure plus ₹1,66,650 in other charges and recorded that the petitioner had constructed it. The money was deposited with SBI, but objections by the Gurdwara Guru Granth Sahib, Bhuntar blocked release, and in 2019 the authority directed that it be put in a fixed deposit.
When the petitioner’s wife applied in 2023, the authority replied that the structure was allegedly the subject of a pending first appeal (RFA No. 240 of 2016). The Gurdwara claimed the structure was over 60 years old and belonged to it. A Patwari’s certificate put its age at about 4–5 years and a valuer’s report at 7–8 years. The respondents also argued that the land dispute was pending and that the petitioner had an alternative remedy.
The Key Question Before the Court
Can compensation for an acquired structure be withheld from the person who built it because the ownership of the underlying land is in dispute?
Structure and Land Are Different Questions
The Court found that the award itself recorded the petitioner as the builder, supported by the Patwari’s certificate, which shifted the burden to the rival claimant. The Gurdwara produced no evidence of ownership of the structure. The civil litigation it relied on concerned only land and sought no relief about the structure: “A land dispute without a specific plea or adjudication qua the structure cannot be treated as proof of entitlement.”
The Court also relied on an earlier High Court ruling in RSA No. 129 of 1997 that the Gurdwara was never validly constituted under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, observing that “there is no legal entity by the name of Gurudwara Guru Granth Sahib Bhuntar.” The outcome of the pending land appeal would not affect the claim. Citing Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, (2019) 09 SC CK 0062 on just and fair compensation, it held that “compensation for such structure must be paid to the person, who has established an interest in the structure.”
What the Court Actually Held
- Compensation for an acquired structure is payable to the person who establishes an interest in that structure.
- A pending dispute over land, without any plea or adjudication about the structure, does not justify withholding structure compensation.
- The Gurdwara’s claim failed for want of evidence, and the earlier ruling held it was not a legal entity.
- The Collector was directed to release ₹66,66,000 and ₹1,66,650 with up-to-date interest, preferably within three weeks.
Why This Judgment Matters
- Highway acquisitions often involve buildings on disputed land; this separates the structure claim from the land claim.
- It ends years of compensation lying in fixed deposit because of an unsupported objection.
- It applies Union of India v. Tarsem Singh’s emphasis on fair compensation under the National Highways Act.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Landowners and Occupants
- Keep proof of construction, such as revenue certificates and valuation reports.
- An award naming you as builder is strong evidence of your interest in the structure.
- Objections about land title alone should not freeze structure compensation.
For Counsel
- Separate claims for land and structure compensation in pleadings.
- Check whether the objector’s civil case actually concerns the structure.
- Seek release with interest where the amount has been kept in deposit.
Key Takeaways
- Structure compensation goes to the person with an interest in the structure.
- A land ownership dispute is not a ground to withhold it.
- ₹66.66 lakh plus ₹1.66 lakh was ordered released with interest.
- The rival claim failed for want of evidence.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who gets compensation for a building acquired for a highway?
The person who establishes an interest in the structure. Here the award itself recorded the petitioner as its builder.
Can the authority withhold structure compensation because the land is disputed?
No. The Court held that a dispute about land, with no claim about the structure, does not justify withholding it.
Did the Court fix an interest rate?
The Court directed release with up-to-date interest but did not specify the rate claimed in the petition.
Conclusion
Eight years after the supplementary award, the High Court cleared the way for the petitioner to receive compensation for the house he lost to the highway project.
Practical takeaway: Where compensation for a structure is frozen because of a land dispute, show your interest in the structure itself and ask for release; a dispute only about land should not hold it up.
Read the full judgment on CourtKutchehry: View judgment →
For more judgments, legal opinions and case analysis, visit courtkutchehry.com