Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23 (0.21 seconds)Section 4 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 6 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 18 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 31 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Smt. Kaushalya Devi Bogra And Others Etc vs The Land Acquisition Officer, ... on 15 February, 1984
"It is trite proposition that prices fetched for small plots cannot form safe bases for valuation of large tracts of land as the two are not comparable properties. (See Collector of Lakhimpur v. B.C. Dutta AIR 1971 SC 2015 : Mirza Naushervan Khan v. Collector (Land Acquisition), Hyderabad: [1975] 2 SCR 184 : Padma Uppal v. State of Punjab : [1977] 1 SCR 329): Smt. Kaushlya Devi Bogra v. Land Acquisition Officer, Aurangabad : [1984] 2 SCR 900. The principle that evidence of market value of sales of small, developed plots is not a safe guide in valuing large extents of land has to be understood in its property perspective. The principle requires that prices fetched for small developed plots cannot directly be adopted in valuing large extents. However, if it is shown that the large extent to be valued does not admit of and is ripe for use for building purposes; that building lots that could be laid out on the land would be good selling propositions and that valuation on the basis of the method of hypothetical lay out could with justification be adopted, then in valuing such small laid out sites the valuation indicated by sale of comparable small sites in the area at or about the time of the notification would be relevant. In such a case, necessary deductions for the extent of land required for the formation of roads and other civil amenities; expenses or development of the sites by laying out roads, drains, sewers, water and electricity lines, and the interest of the cut lays for the period of deferment of the realization of the price; the profits on the venture etc. are to be made.
Brig. Sahib Singh Kalha And Ors. vs Amritsar Improvement Trust And Ors. on 1 October, 1981
In Sahib Singh Kalha v. Amritsar Improvement Trust: AIR 1982 SC 940, this Court indicated that deductions for land required for roads and other developmental expenses can, together, come up to as much as 53 per cent. But the prices fetched for small plots cannot directly be applied in the case of large areas, for the reason that the former reflects the 'retail' price of the land the latter the 'wholesale' price."
K. Vasundara Devi vs Revenue Divisional Officer ... on 27 July, 1995
In K. Vasundara Devi v. Revenue Divisional Officer (IAO) : AIR 1995 SC 2481, the Apex Court reiterated that when genuine and reliable sale deeds of small extents were considered to determine market value, the same will not form sole basis to determine market value of large tracts of land. Sufficient deduction should be made to arrive at a just and fair market value of large tracts of land.