#Compensation Apportionment

The Supreme Court declared Lok Adalat awards void where any claimant's signature is missing, overturning the High Court's endorsement. It remitted the compensation dispute for fresh reference to the civil court under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, impacting all parties in similar land-acquisition cases.

The J&K and Ladakh High Court has ruled that under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, authorities cannot disburse land acquisition compensation until a civil court determines the rightful ownership shares among co-heirs. This binds revenue and acquisition officials to defer payment in disputed inheritance cases, reinforcing procedural fairness and preventing unilateral appropriation of shared property rights.

Orissa High Court rules that withdrawal of a land compensation reference under Section 3-H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956, without adjudication on merits, is illegal. The Court directed restoration of the case, emphasizing that statutory references cannot be bypassed by administrative action, upholding principles of natural justice for landowners.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that when a stationary vehicle is struck due to the contributory negligence of the other driver, compensation must be apportioned based on proven fault, not imposed as strict liability under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. This clarifies that claimants cannot bypass evidentiary burdens by relying on presumptive liability, affecting how claimants and insurers assess fault in multi-party accidents.

Bombay High Court clarifies that under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956, disputes over apportionment of compensation must be referred to civil court, not decided by the Competent Authority.