In Brief
The Supreme Court held that a part of a building can be acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 without acquiring the underlying land when the building owner does not own that land. Where the State or another entity (such as a Port Trust) owns the land and a private owner has only the building or part thereof, the State can acquire that portion by paying adequate compensation. The Court rejected the argument that such acquisition violates Article 300A or the doctrine of eminent domain. It also overruled earlier High Court decisions requiring that land must necessarily be acquired whenever a building is acquired, finding such decisions incompatible with the modern reality of dual ownership. Compensation under section 23 of the Act covers any diminution in utility of the retained land.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.