In Brief
The appellant and three family members sought allotment of 500 sq. yards each from an acquisition in 1974, despite having received 250 sq. yards each from an earlier separate acquisition in 1973. The Trust and High Court rejected the claim, arguing prior allotment and an earlier settlement precluded further claims. The Supreme Court held that each acquisition must be treated separately; prior allotment under one acquisition does not bar a claim as a "local displaced person" under a subsequent, distinct acquisition at another location. The earlier compromise addressed only the acquisition challenge, not statutory allotment rights. The application, made in 2010 following actual dispossession in 2008, was not unduly delayed. However, the Court limited relief to 250 sq. yards per person to serve justice. Reserve price was fixed as of the 2010 application date.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.