Reviewed case brief
Somawanti v State of Punjab
AIR 1963 SC 151
The Supreme Court held that the adequacy of compensation paid under land acquisition proceedings is not justiciable under Article 31(2) as it then stood (prior to the 44th Amendment). Courts can examine whether "compensation" in the legal sense has been provided but cannot sit in judgment over its q
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Year
- 1963
- Subjects
- Land Laws
- Reviewed
- 2026-06-18
Rule established
The adequacy of compensation in land acquisition is not justiciable; courts can only examine whether compensation has been provided, not whether it is adequate
Facts
- The State of Punjab acquired land belonging to the petitioners under the Land Acquisition Act 1894
Issues
Held
- The **adequacy of compensation is not justiciable** after the Fourth Amendment to Article 31
Ratio decidendi
Under Article 31(2) as amended by the Fourth Amendment, the adequacy of compensation for compulsory acquisition is a matter for the legislature and not subject to judicial scrutiny. Courts retain jurisdiction only to determine whether what has been provided constitutes "compensation" in the legal sense and whether the acquisition genuinely serves a public purpose. The government's declaration of public purpose is generally conclusive unless it is a colourable exercise of power.
How to use it in an exam
- Use for pre-LARR Act position on justiciability of compensation
Editorial source
AIR 1963 SC 151; verified via SCC Online
Educational summary only. Read the reported judgment or an authorised law report before relying on the case professionally.