Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 430 (1.00 seconds)

P. Vishnuvardhan Reddy vs Government Of A.P. And Anr. on 18 April, 2003

Moreover, this principle was enunciated by the Supreme Court in Kauhsalya Devi Bogra v. Land Acquisition Officer, case (supra) for the first time and it was being enlarged in subsequent decisions right up to Kasturi's case (supra). The Division Bench obviously was not having the advantage of these decisions. Therefore, in the fact situation we have to hold that the value of small extent of lands can be considered for fixation of market value of larger extents subject to certain condition. Admittedly, the Division Bench fixed the value after discarding these documents. In the wake of the decisions of Supreme Court, we have to follow the Order basing on the small extents if the Sale Deed are genuine and bona fide untainted by extraneous consideration. If they are found to be motivated sales with a view to obtain higher compensation, they are to be discarded. The further requirement is that the lands should be situate in the same or neighbourhood of the acquired lands during the relevant or near about period. Even taking into consideration post notification sales is not totally prohibited. In the instant case, the reference Court did not find fault with the documents and nature of transactions. There is also no rule that the Courts ought not to depend on single transaction. If the transaction conforms to the tests laid down by the Supreme Court there is no reason why they should not be relied upon for assessing correct market value. Exs. A-3, A-4 and A-5 relate to small extents of lands and the transactions are in 1972. Ex. A-6 is dated 27-11-1974. Out of Exs.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 24 - Cited by 0 - R S Reddy - Full Document

M/S Bajaj Hindustan Ltd. vs Rajendra Singh And Others on 6 July, 2018

In making this observation Court relied on its earlier decisions in Kasturi vs. State of Haryana (supra), Tejumal Bhojwani vs. State of U.P., (2003) 10 SCC 525, V. Hanumantha Reddy vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer (supra), H.P. Housing Board vs. Bharat S. Negi, (2004) 2 SCC 184 and Kishan Tandon vs. Allahabad Development Authority, (2004) 10 SCC 745, Lal Chand vs. Union of India (supra), A.P. Housing Board vs. K. Manohar Reddy, (2010) 12 SCC 707 and Subh Ram vs. State of Harayana (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 68 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Imtyaz Alam & Others vs Collector Bhadhohi & Others on 5 January, 2017

In making this observation Court relied on its earlier decisions in Kasturi vs. State of Haryana (supra), Tejumal Bhojwani vs. State of U.P., (2003) 10 SCC 525, V. Hanumantha Reddy vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer (supra), H.P. Housing Board vs. Bharat S. Negi, (2004) 2 SCC 184 and Kishan Tandon vs. Allahabad Development Authority, (2004) 10 SCC 745, Lal Chand vs. Union of India (supra), A.P. Housing Board vs. K. Manohar Reddy, (2010) 12 SCC 707 and Subh Ram vs. State of Harayana (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 64 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Special Tahsildar vs Jaganathan Gounder on 2 March, 2009

29. We are not, however, oblivious of the fact that normally one-third deduction of further amount of compensation has been directed in some cases. (See Kasturi v. State of Haryana [(2003) 1 SCC 354}, Tejumal Bhojwani v. State of U.P. {(2003) 10 SCC 525}, V. Hanumantha Reddy v. Land Acquisition Officer & Mandal R.Officer {(2003) 12 SCC 642} , H.P. Housing Board v. Bharat S. Negi {(2004(2) SCC 184} and Kiran Tandon v. Allahabad Development Authority and anr. {(2004) 10 SCC 745}"

U.P. State Industrial Development ... vs Nazir And Others on 16 April, 2018

In making this observation Court relied on its earlier decisions in Kasturi vs. State of Haryana (supra), Tejumal Bhojwani vs. State of U.P., (2003) 10 SCC 525, V. Hanumantha Reddy vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer (supra), H.P. Housing Board vs. Bharat S. Negi, (2004) 2 SCC 184 and Kishan Tandon vs. Allahabad Development Authority, (2004) 10 SCC 745, Lal Chand vs. Union of India (supra), A.P. Housing Board vs. K. Manohar Reddy, (2010) 12 SCC 707 and Subh Ram vs. State of Harayana (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 65 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad vs Smt. Rukman Devi & Others on 23 February, 2016

In making this observation Court relied on its earlier decisions in Kasturi vs. State of Haryana (supra), Tejumal Bhojwani vs. State of U.P., (2003) 10 SCC 525, V. Hanumantha Reddy vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer (supra), H.P. Housing Board vs. Bharat S. Negi, (2004) 2 SCC 184 and Kishan Tandon vs. Allahabad Development Authority, (2004) 10 SCC 745, Lal Chand vs. Union of India (supra), A.P. Housing Board vs. K. Manohar Reddy, (2010) 12 SCC 707 and Subh Ram vs. State of Harayana (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 61 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Special Tahsildar vs Ramayammal on 2 March, 2009

29. We are not, however, oblivious of the fact that normally one-third deduction of further amount of compensation has been directed in some cases. (See Kasturi v. State of Haryana [(2003) 1 SCC 354}, Tejumal Bhojwani v. State of U.P. {(2003) 10 SCC 525}, V. Hanumantha Reddy v. Land Acquisition Officer & Mandal R.Officer {(2003) 12 SCC 642} , H.P. Housing Board v. Bharat S. Negi {(2004(2) SCC 184} and Kiran Tandon v. Allahabad Development Authority and anr. {(2004) 10 SCC 745}"

Ganga Pollution Control Unit,U.P. Jal ... vs Gaya Prasad & Another on 31 May, 2017

In making this observation Court relied on its earlier decisions in Kasturi vs. State of Haryana (supra), Tejumal Bhojwani vs. State of U.P., (2003) 10 SCC 525, V. Hanumantha Reddy vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer (supra), H.P. Housing Board vs. Bharat S. Negi, (2004) 2 SCC 184 and Kishan Tandon vs. Allahabad Development Authority, (2004) 10 SCC 745, Lal Chand vs. Union of India (supra), A.P. Housing Board vs. K. Manohar Reddy, (2010) 12 SCC 707 and Subh Ram vs. State of Harayana (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 64 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bulandshahr Khurja Developmenet ... vs Smt. Tahira Khatoon And Others on 25 May, 2016

In making this observation Court relied on its earlier decisions in Kasturi vs. State of Haryana (supra), Tejumal Bhojwani vs. State of U.P., (2003) 10 SCC 525, V. Hanumantha Reddy vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer (supra), H.P. Housing Board vs. Bharat S. Negi, (2004) 2 SCC 184 and Kishan Tandon vs. Allahabad Development Authority, (2004) 10 SCC 745, Lal Chand vs. Union of India (supra), A.P. Housing Board vs. K. Manohar Reddy, (2010) 12 SCC 707 and Subh Ram vs. State of Harayana (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 74 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State Of U.P. & Another vs Kunwar Pal Singh on 30 May, 2017

In making this observation Court relied on its earlier decisions in Kasturi vs. State of Haryana (supra), Tejumal Bhojwani vs. State of U.P., (2003) 10 SCC 525, V. Hanumantha Reddy vs. Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer (supra), H.P. Housing Board vs. Bharat S. Negi, (2004) 2 SCC 184 and Kishan Tandon vs. Allahabad Development Authority, (2004) 10 SCC 745, Lal Chand vs. Union of India (supra), A.P. Housing Board vs. K. Manohar Reddy, (2010) 12 SCC 707 and Subh Ram vs. State of Harayana (supra).
Allahabad High Court Cites 51 - Cited by 7 - S Agarwal - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next