Court Rules That Landowners Can Seek Further Re-determination of Compensation Under Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act, Ensuring Equality Among Similarly Situated Owners
In a significant ruling on September 14, 2026, the Delhi High Court delivered a landmark judgment affirming that landowners whose land has been acquired by the government can file multiple applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to seek re-determination of compensation based on successive enhanced awards passed by appellate courts. The judgment came in a batch of appeals filed by appellants including Sky High Agro Expo Pvt Ltd, Monika Garg, and Superb Agro Expo Pvt Ltd, challenging the dismissal of their applications for further enhancement of compensation.
The land in question was acquired under Award No. 1/DC(W)/2006-07 pursuant to notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. Initially, the Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation at Rs. 15.7 lakhs per acre. Aggrieved landowners had earlier succeeded in increasing this amount to Rs. 20.35 lakhs per acre through a reference petition in the case of Kailashwati v. Union of India (2010). Following that, the appellants filed applications under Section 28A seeking re-determination to reflect this enhancement.
While the Collector initially allowed the applications and enhanced compensation accordingly, a subsequent judgment in Jamna v. Union of India (2011) further raised compensation to Rs. 23.93 lakhs per acre. The appellants then sought a second re-determination based on this later award. However, the Additional District Judge dismissed these claims, holding that once compensation was re-determined under Section 28A on the basis of the earlier award, no further re-determination was permissible.
Rejecting this view, the Delhi High Court, led by Justice Amit Mahajan, referenced a recent Supreme Court decision in Andanayya v. Deputy Chief Engineer (2026), which clarified that a second application under Section 28A is maintainable even after an earlier application has been allowed and money received. The Court emphasized the doctrine of merger, which ensures that once enhanced compensation is granted to one landowner based on appellate awards, similarly situated landowners are entitled to equal benefits. The Court held that denying the appellants the benefit of the later enhancement violated the object and scope of Section 28A, which aims to maintain parity and equality among landowners.
The Court further observed that the earlier enhancement granted to the appellants had attained finality as it was not challenged by the respondents, and therefore the Reference Court erred in denying the further enhancement. The judgment underscores that the right to seek re-determination of compensation based on appellate awards cannot be curtailed merely because an earlier re-determination was granted based on reference court awards.
The appeals were allowed with consequential relief, directing that the appellants be granted compensation at the enhanced rate of Rs. 23.93 lakhs per acre as awarded in the Jamna case. This ruling is expected to have wide-reaching implications for land acquisition matters across the country, offering a pathway for landowners to secure fair compensation reflective of judicially recognized market values at appellate stages.
Bottom Line:
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 28A Second application under Section 28A for further re-determination of compensation based on appellate court's award is maintainable, even if earlier application was entertained and money received. Doctrine of merger applies to extend benefits of enhanced compensation to similarly placed landowners.
Statutory provision(s):
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 4, Section 6, Section 11, Section 18, Section 28A, Section 54
Sky High Agro Expo Pvt Ltd v. Union of India, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2978367
