#Compensation Disbursement

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that compensation awarded under the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal must be disbursed directly to the victim, not locked in fixed deposits without compelling reason. This reinforces the victim’s absolute right to immediate access to damages, aligning with natural justice and the humanitarian intent of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Orissa High Court reinforces that once a compensation enhancement order under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act is finalized, administrative delays cannot override judicial directives. The court directed the state to sanction and disburse the 27-year-old enhanced compensation by July 2026, with 9% interest from 1979, upholding the constitutional right to property against procedural bottlenecks.

The Gauhati High Court ruled that while Section 63 of the RFCTLARR Act bars civil courts from adjudicating direct land acquisition disputes, they retain jurisdiction over related disputes such as the validity of partition deeds. The Court directed expedited disposal of the title suit to prevent prejudice to landless petitioners, clarifying the scope of judicial intervention in compensation matters.

Chhattisgarh High Court rules that statutory interest under the National Highways Act is payable from the date of possession, irrespective of omissions in the award or NHAI’s administrative delays. The judgment reinforces that landowners are entitled to timely compensation, and public authorities cannot evade liability due to internal procedural failures.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has ruled that compensation funds deposited in an FDR for a minor accident victim must be fully released upon attaining majority, rejecting arbitrary partial disbursements by claims tribunals. This sets a critical precedent protecting the financial autonomy of young survivors, ensuring they can access their full award for education, housing, or rehabilitation without bureaucratic delay.

The Bombay High Court ruled that under Section 77 of the LARR Act, 2013, authorities cannot demand physical presence of landowners to disburse compensation if identity and supporting documents are duly verified. This clarifies administrative overreach and ensures timely payment to claimants who have fulfilled statutory requirements, particularly those unable to appear in person due to distance, disability, or other legitimate constraints.

Gauhati High Court rules that landowners (pattadars) are entitled to restoration of land and accrued requisition rent where authorities occupy land without valid acquisition or compensation disbursement, even if compensation was deposited but not paid. The judgment reinforces Article 300A protections against unlawful state possession and mandates restitution for affected landowners.

Bombay High Court adjourns constitutional challenge to Sections 3G(5) and (6) of the National Highways Act, 1956, pending Supreme Court's final determination.