{"id":8395,"date":"1975-04-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1975-04-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975"},"modified":"2019-03-19T13:55:24","modified_gmt":"2019-03-19T08:25:24","slug":"harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975","title":{"rendered":"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition … on 8 April, 1975"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition … on 8 April, 1975<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 1097, \t\t 1975 SCR 79<\/div>\n
Author: A Ray<\/div>\n
Bench: Ray, A.N. (Cj)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nHARSOOKDAS BALKISSENDAS\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE FIRST LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT08\/04\/1975\n\nBENCH:\nRAY, A.N. (CJ)\nBENCH:\nRAY, A.N. (CJ)\nKRISHNAIYER, V.R.\n\nCITATION:\n 1975 AIR 1097\t\t  1975 SCR   79\n 1975 SCC  (2) 256\n\n\nACT:\nLand Acquisition Act, s. 49(2)-Scope of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nSection\t 49(2) of the Land Acquisition Act provides that  if\nin  the\t case  of any claim under s. 23(1),  thirdly,  by  a\nperson interested, on account of the severing of the land to\nbe  acquired from his other land the appropriate  Government\nis  of\tthe  opinion  that the\tclaim  is  unreasonable\t and\nexcessive,  it may, at any time before the  Collector,,\t has\nmade  his award, order the acquisition of the whole  of\t the\nland  of which the land first sought to be acquired forms  a\npart.\nA  part of a large area of land belonging to  the  appellant\nwas  sought to be acquired by the State.  The appellant\t put\nforward\t a claim on account of damage caused  by  severance,\nunder  s.  23(1)  thirdly.  The claim was  held\t to  be\t un-\nreasonable  and excessive, by the Government.  Sanction\t for\nthe  acquisition of the entire land of the appellant  having\nbeen  approved, a further portion of the land was  acquired.\nThe  appellant contended: (1) that s. 49(2) applies only  to\nland  with  buildings, that the land acquired was  a  vacant\nland with no house or buildings; (2) that he made the  claim\nfor compensation under third and fourth clauses of s. 23  of\nthe  Act and therefore s. 49(2) had no application; and\t (3)\nthat  the acquisition of. a portion of the land was not\t for\npublic purpose as there was no further declaration of public\npurpose and the acquisition was therefore invalid.\nDismissing the appeal,\nHELD  :(1)  (a)\t Land is defined in s. 3(a) of\tthe  Act  to\ninclude\t benefits to arise out of land, things\tattached  to\nthe  earth or permanently fastened to anything\tattached  to\nthe earth.  Therefore, land contemplated in s. 49(2) of\t the\nAct  may be land or land or land including building or\tpart\nof a building. [81B-C]\n(b)  The  contention that if there is vacant land, s.  49(2)\nof  the Act has no application is not only a  misreading  of\nthe decision of the Court in State of Bihar\tv.     Kundan\nSingh<\/a>  [1964] 3 S. C. R. 382 but also the relevant  Section.\n[81 D].\nIn the instant case the contention of the appellant that  it\nwas vacant land was also contrary to facts.  The material on\nrecord shows that there were certain structures on the land.\n[80 H].\n(2)  If\t a claim under the third clause of s. 23(1)  of\t the\nAct  is\t made  the requirement of s. 49(2)  of\tthe  Act  is\nsatisfied.   Addition of a claim under the fourth clause  of\ns. 23(1) of the Act makes no difference. [82 B].\n(3)  (a)  Sub-sections\t(2)  and (3) of s.  49\tof  the\t Act\nindicate that the acquisition for public purpose need not be\nstated.\t Section 49(3) of the Act specifically provides that\nno  fresh declaration under ss. 6 to 10 of the Act shall  be\nnecessary.  Section 49(2) of the Act implies public  purpose\ninasmuch as the compensation for acquisition is payable\t out\nIf  the\t public\t land.\t Sections 4 and 5  of  the  Act\t are\nexcluded  because of proposal by owner, in case\t of  further\nacquisition  under  s.\t49(1) of, the Act  and\tproposal  by\nGovernment for further acquisition in a case under s.  49(2)\nof  the Act.  All that is necessary is that in one case\t the\nowner  of the land and in the other the Government must\t act\nunder s. 49(1) and 49(2) of the Act, respectively before the\naward is made.\tThe public purpose is to prevent people from\nmaking\texaggerated  claims.  Section 49(2) of\tthe  Act  is\nsubsidiary to public purpose.  The acquisition is in aid  of\nthat purpose. [83 A-C].\n(b)  Section  49  (2) of the Act does not require  that\t the\nopinion shall be formed after hearing the person  concerned.\n[83 D].\n80\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 558 of 1970
\nFrom  the  Judgment and Order dated 26th May,  1965  of\t the
\nCalcutta High Court in Appeal from Original Order No. 260 of
\n1973.\n<\/p>\n
L.   M.\t Singhvi, O.  C. Mathur, D. N.\tMishra\tand  J.\t B.
\nDadachanji for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
Niren De, Attorney General of India, D. N. Mukherjee, G.  S.
\nChatterjee, and Sukumar Basu for respondents Nos. 1 and 4.
\nNiren  De, Attorney General of India, S. K. Dholakia and  R.
\nC. Bhatia for respondent No. 3.\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nRAY, C. J.-This appeal by certificate raises the question as
\nto  whether  section  49(2)  of\t the  Land  Acquisition\t Act
\nhereinafter  referred to as the Act has any  application  to
\nthe acquisition of the land in question.\n<\/p>\n
The premises in question are 2 Gariahat Road now known as  2
\nRaja  Subodh  Mullick  Road, Calcutta.\tThe  total  area  is
\napproximately  23 bighas.  The appellant alleges that  there
\nare no houses or buildings.  The Land Acquisition  Collector
\nfound  certain\tstructures occupied by certain\tpersons\t and
\nother  structures and a compound wall and the major  portion
\nof  the\t land to be vacant.  There is a; big  tank  covering
\nover  3 bighas of the land.  The appellant alleges that\t the
\nland  is  highly developed and is ideal for  building  site.
\nThe  Land Acquisition Collector found the major\t portion  of
\nthe  land  undeveloped and below road level  and  to  become
\nwaterlogged during rainy season.  The appellant denies these
\nallegations.\n<\/p>\n
Out of the total area the State in 1959 acquired 1 bigha, 13
\nchattack,  43  sq.  feet  for  the  State  Transport.\t The
\nappellant  claimed Rs. 3,50,000 inter alia for severance  of
\nthe  land  acquired.  In the month of  September,  1962\t the
\nGovernment communicated to the appellant that the Government
\nagreed that the claim put forward by the appellant under the
\nclause “thirdly of sub-section (1) of section 23 of the Act”
\nis unreasonable and excessive.\n<\/p>\n
The  sanction of the Governor was therefor accorded  to\t the
\nacquisition  of\t the  entire  premises\t2,  Gariahat   Road,
\nCalcutta under section 49(2) of the Act.  Between the months
\nof  February  and  September, 1960 notices  were  issued  to
\nacquire\t a further area of 7 bighas, 4 cottahs, 9  chittacks
\nand 10 sq. feet.  The premises were acquired.  An award\t was
\nmade.\n<\/p>\n
The  principal contention of the appellant is  that  section
\n49(2)  of  the\tAct  has  no  application  in  the  case  of
\nacquisition of vacant land.  The appellant contends that the
\nland  acquired\tin the present case was vacant.\t  The  State
\ncontended to the contrary.  The materials on record  support
\nthe contention of the State.  The appellant submits that
\n81<\/span>
\nsection\t 49(2)\tof  the Act applies  only  where  land\twith
\nbuilding is taken.  Section 49(2) of the Act is as follows
\n\t      “If,  in the case of any claim  under  section
\n\t      23,  sub-section\t(1), thirdly,  by  a  person
\n\t      interested, on account of the severing of\t the
\n\t      land  to be acquired from his other land,\t the
\n\t      appropriate Government is of opinion that\t the
\n\t      claim  is unreasonable and excessive, it\tmay,
\n\t      at any time before the Collector has made\t his
\n\t      award,  order the acquisition of the whole  of
\n\t      the land of which the land first sought to  be
\n\t      acquired forms a part.”\n<\/p>\n
Land  is  defined  in section 3(a) of  the  Act\t to  include
\nbenefits  to  arise out of land and things attached  to\t the
\nearth  or permanently fastened to anything attached  to\t the
\nearth.\tTherefore, land contemplated in section 49(2) of the
\nAct  may  be land or land including building or\t part  of  a
\nbuilding.\n<\/p>\n
Counsel\t for  the appellant relied on the decision  of\tthis
\nCourt  in  State of Bihar v. Kundan Singh &  Anr.<\/a>  [1964]  3
\nS.C.R. 382 and extracted the observation at page 394 of\t the
\nReport\tthat  section 49(2) of the  Act\t contemplates  cases
\nwhere  land  is acquired and it is shown to form part  of  a
\nhouse.\tIn short, the contention of the appellant is that if
\nthere  is  vacant  land\t section 49(2) of  the\tAct  has  no
\napplication.   This is not only misreading the decision\t but
\nalso the relevant section.\n<\/p>\n
In   Kundan   Singh’s\tcase  (supra)\tthe   question\t for
\nconsideration  was whether the desire of the owner  for\t the
\nacquisition of the entire house under section 49 (1) of\t the
\nAct should be expressed before the award is made.  In Kundan
\nSingh’s case (supra) the State acquired a plot of land which
\nconsisted  of  the main house and an outhouse with  an\topen
\nspace.\tThe owner of the property was not satisfied with the
\naward.\t The owner contended that other lands and  buildings
\ncontiguous  to\tthe  land and building\tacquired  which\t all
\nbelonged to the owner had not been acquired.  As a result of
\npartial\t acquisition the owner alleged loss.  The ruling  of
\nthis  Court  is that such plea under section 49 of  the\t Act
\ncannot\tbe considered in an enquiry under section 18 of\t the
\nAct.   Section 49(1) of the Act shows that if the owner\t has
\nany  objection to the acquisition of a part of his house  it
\nis open to him to withdraw or modify his objection before an
\naward is made under section II of the Act.  If an  objection
\nunder section 49(1) of the Act is taken by the owner and the
\nCollector decides to accept the objection then the Collector
\nacquires the whole of the house.  If the Collector does\t not
\naccept\tthe claim the matter is judicially determined  under
\nthe second proviso to section 49(1) of the Act.
\nSection 49(2) of the Act states that where on account of the
\nsevering of the land to be acquired from his other land, the
\nperson\tinterested  prefers a claim under the  third  clause
\nunder  section\t23(1) of. the Act and the Government  is  of
\nopinion that the claim is unrea-\n<\/p>\n
82<\/span><\/p>\n
sonable or excessive, the Collector may, at any time  before
\nthe award is made, order the acquisition of the land.
\nThe appellant submits that the appellant made the claim\t for
\ncompensation  under the third and fourth clauses of  section
\n23(1)  of the Act, and, therefore, section 49(2) of the\t Act
\nhas no application.  In one of the letters of the  appellant
\ndated  25  February, 1960 it is stated that the\t area  of  7
\nbighas,\t 4 cottahs, 9 chittaks and 10 sq. feet of from\tland
\nhas been acquired for the purpose of over-bridge at Gariahat
\nRoad  level  crossing including the entire frontage  of\t the
\nsaid premises as a result of which the remaining portion  of
\nthe  land  measuring about 16 bighas of land  will  be\tland
\nlocked\tcausing\t heavy\tdamages,  severance  and   injurious
\naffectation.   In  the writ petition the  appellant  claimed
\ndamages only in respect of severance.  Section 23(1)  clause
\nthree  of the Act speaks of damage sustained by\t the  person
\ninterested at the time of the Collector’s taking  possession
\nof  the\t land by reason of severance of such land  from\t the
\nother  land of the owner.  Clause four of section  23(1)  of
\nthe  Act speaks of claim for damage sustained by the  person
\ninterested at the time of the Collector’s taking  possession
\nof the land by reason of the acquisition including affecting
\nhis  other  property,  movable or immovable,  in  any  other
\nmanner,\t or his earnings.  Therefore, if a claim  under\t the
\nthird  clause  of  section  23(1) of the  Act  is  made\t the
\nrequirement  of\t section  49(2) of  the\t Act  is  satisfied.
\nAddition of a claim under the fourth clause of section 23(1)
\nof the Act makes no difference.\n<\/p>\n
In  the\t present case, the land was not\t completely  vacant.
\nEven  if there is vacant land section 49(2) of the Act\twill
\nbe attracted by reason of definition of land.  To accede  to
\nthe contention on behalf of the appellant that section 49(2)
\nspeaks only of acquisition of land along with a building and
\nnot to the case of acquisition of vacant land is to rob\t the
\nmeaning\t of  land under section 49 (2) of the  Act  and\t the
\ncontent\t of section 49(2) of the Act.  Section 49(2) of\t the
\nAct  applies  to cases of acquisition of vacant\t land  along
\nwith structures.\n<\/p>\n
The  object  of section 49(1) of the Act is to give  to\t the
\nowner the option whether he would like part to be  acquired.
\nThe  Government\t cannot take the other\tpart  under  section
\n49(1) of the Act unless the owner says so.  Section 49(2) of
\nthe  Act  has nothing to do with section 49(1) of  the\tAct.
\nSection 49(2) of the Act gives the option to the  Government
\nonly where the claim under the third clause of section 23(1)
\nof  the Act is excessive.  Reference to the third clause  of
\nsection 23(1) of the Act makes it clear that the claim under
\nthe  third  clause of section 23(1) is for  severance.\t The
\nGovernment  in such a case of acquisition of  the  remaining
\nportion of the land under section 49(2) of the Act saves the
\npublic\texchequer money which otherwise will be the  subject
\nmatter of a claim for severance.\n<\/p>\n
Counsel\t on  behalf  of the  appellant\tcontended  that\t the
\nacquisition  of\t the  remaining land was not  for  a  public
\npurpose and was, therefore, invalid.  It was said that there
\nshould\thave  been  a fresh declaration\t of  public  purpose
\nafter. the proposed acquisition of the remaining
\n83<\/span>
\nportion of the land.  This contention is unacceptable.\tSub-
\nsections (2) and (3) of section 49 of the Act indicate\tthat
\nthe  acquisition  for  public purpose need  not\t be  stated.
\nSection 49(3) of the Act specifically provides that no fresh
\ndeclaration  under  sections  6 to 10 of the  Act  shall  be
\nnecessary.  Section 49(2) of the Act implies public  purpose
\ninasmuch as the compensation for acquisition is payable\t out
\nof  the\t public\t fund.\t Sections 4 and 5  of  the  Act\t are
\nexcluded  because  of proposal by owner in case\t of  further
\nacquisition  under section 49(1) of the Act and proposal  by
\nGovernment  for further acquisition in a case under  section
\n49(2) of the Act.  All that is necessary is that in one case
\nthe  owner of the land and in the other the Government\tmust
\nact  under sections 49(1) and 49(2) of the Act\trespectively
\nbefore the award is made.  The public purpose is to  prevent
\npeople from making exaggerated claims.\tSection 49(2) of the
\nAct  is subsidiary to public purpose.  ‘The  acquisition  is
\nfor  public purpose.  Tile subsequent acquisition is in\t aid
\nof that purpose.\n<\/p>\n
Counsel\t on  behalf of the appellant submitted that  he\t was
\nentitled to be heard before the order was made under section
\n49(2) of the Act.  This submission is unacceptable.  Section
\n49(2) of the Act does not require that the opinion shall  be
\nformed after hearing the person concerned.
\nFor  these reasons, the appeal fails and is  dismissed.\t  In
\nview of the fact ,hat the High Court directed each party  to
\npay  and  bear its own cost, there will be no  order  as  to
\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n
P.B.R.\t\t\t\t\t\t      Appeal\ndismissed.\n84<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition … on 8 April, 1975 Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 1097, 1975 SCR 79 Author: A Ray Bench: Ray, A.N. (Cj) PETITIONER: HARSOOKDAS BALKISSENDAS Vs. RESPONDENT: THE FIRST LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT08\/04\/1975 BENCH: RAY, A.N. (CJ) BENCH: RAY, A.N. (CJ) KRISHNAIYER, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8395","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nHarsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition ... on 8 April, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition ... on 8 April, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1975-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-19T08:25:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition … on 8 April, 1975\",\"datePublished\":\"1975-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-19T08:25:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975\"},\"wordCount\":1757,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975\",\"name\":\"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition ... on 8 April, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1975-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-19T08:25:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition … on 8 April, 1975\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition ... on 8 April, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition ... on 8 April, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1975-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-19T08:25:24+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition … on 8 April, 1975","datePublished":"1975-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-19T08:25:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975"},"wordCount":1757,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975","name":"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition ... on 8 April, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1975-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-19T08:25:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harsookdas-balkissendas-vs-the-first-land-acquisition-on-8-april-1975#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Harsookdas Balkissendas vs The First Land Acquisition … on 8 April, 1975"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8395","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8395"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8395\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8395"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8395"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8395"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}