Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home
Full Text

FOMENTO RESORTS AND HOTELS LTD. AND ANOTHER vs. MINGUEL MARTINS AND OTHERS

SCR Citation: [2009] 3 S.C.R. 1
Year/Volume: 2009/ Volume 3
Date of Judgment: 20 January 2009
Petitioner: FOMENTO RESORTS AND HOTELS LTD. AND ANOTHER
Disposal Nature: Appeals Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2009 INSC 39
Judgment Delivered by: Hon'ble Mr. Justice G.S. Singhvi
Respondent: MINGUEL MARTINS AND OTHERS
Case Type: CIVIL APPEAL /4154/2000
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

Land Acquisition Act, 1894:

Sections 4(1), SA, 6, 16, 40, 41, 42 -Acquisition of/and -- Whether under s.40(1)(aa) or under s.40(1)(b) - Public access to beach earlier available through the land - Whether distinguished or vests with the State Government - Whether construction of hotel building on a portion of the land is contrary to the purpose of acquisition and violative of the prohibition clause in the agreement with the Government - Whether facilities and amenities to the public created by the owner of the land is contrary to the purpose of acquisition and violative of the said agreement and could be made a ground for resumption of the acquisition of land - On appeal against the judgment of the High Court on the above mentioned issues - Held: The acquisition was under s.40(1)(aa) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the contrary finding recorded by the High Court is legally unsustainable - Alternative road, parking and public footpath provided in lieu of access available through a particular piece of land cannot be made basis for depriving members of the public of their age old right to go to the beach through another piece of land - High Court did not commit any error in issuing a mandamus in this regard - It is neither proper nor justified to deny the people of their traditional right of access to the beach through a particular piece of land by using the roads provided in another piece of land - Neither the State Government nor the Goa Town and building on the acquired land in violation of clause 4(viii) of the Agreement which has the force of law by virtue of s.42 of the Land Acquisition Act - Hence, High Court rightly ordered demolition of the extension of the hotel building - Agreement silent on the issue of making the facilities created by the appellants open for public use without permission and payment of fees - Thus, it cannot be said that these facilities should be made available to the general public free of costs - Since execution of most of the directions given by the High + Court remained stayed during the pendency of the appeal, it is proper to issue certain directions - Goa, Daman & Diu Town and Country Planning Act, 1974 - Sections 4, 8, 44(1), 49(1) - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order VI Rule 15.

2. Case referred
3. Act
      No Data Found!!!!!
4. Keyword
  • Land Acquisition Act
5. Equivalent citation
    Citation(s) 2009 (3) SCC 571 = 2009 (3) Suppl. SCC 571 = 2009 (1) JT 470 = 2009 (1) Suppl. JT 470 = 2009 (1) SCALE 758