Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.69 seconds)
Chandrashekar (D) By Lrs. & Ors vs Land Acquisition Officer & Anr on 22 November, 2011 cites

Chimanlal Hargovinddas vs Special Land Acquisition Officer, ... on 21 July, 1988

26. The only other deduction allowed by the High Court was made towards "waiting period". Under this head the High Court allowed a deduction of 5 percent. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellants did not assail the aforesaid deduction. It is therefore not necessary for us to record any finding in respect of the deduction applied by the High Court under the head of "waiting period". Needless to mention, that "waiting period" has been held to be one of the relevant components for making deductions by this Court in Chimanlal Hargovinddas vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Poona & Anr., (1988) 3 SCC 751, Land Acquisition Officer Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittor vs. L. Kamalamma (Smt.) Dead by LRs.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 832 - M P Thakkar - Full Document

The Land Acquisition Officer Revenue ... vs Smt. L. Kamalamma (Deed) By Trs. & Ors., ... on 19 January, 1998

26. The only other deduction allowed by the High Court was made towards "waiting period". Under this head the High Court allowed a deduction of 5 percent. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellants did not assail the aforesaid deduction. It is therefore not necessary for us to record any finding in respect of the deduction applied by the High Court under the head of "waiting period". Needless to mention, that "waiting period" has been held to be one of the relevant components for making deductions by this Court in Chimanlal Hargovinddas vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Poona & Anr., (1988) 3 SCC 751, Land Acquisition Officer Revenue Divisional Officer, Chittor vs. L. Kamalamma (Smt.) Dead by LRs.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 412 - Full Document

Lal Chand vs Union Of India & Anr on 12 August, 2009

27. Our conclusions in respect of the quantum of permissible deductions have been recorded in paragraphs 18 and 19 hereinabove. While determining the validity of individual deductions, it is also imperative to examine whether or not the total deductions put together fall within legal parameters. We have upheld 55 percent deduction accorded by the High Court towards "development". We have also individually upheld deduction of 10 percent on account of "de-escalation", as also, the deduction of 5 percent on account of "waiting period". Cumulatively these deductions would amount to 70 percent (55+10+5=70). The outer benchmark for deductions laid down by this Court in Lal Chand's case (supra) and in Andhra Pradesh Housing Board's case (supra) is 75 percent. Cumulatively also the deduction allowed by the High Court, fall well within the parameters laid down by this Court. We therefore find no infirmity in the quantum of accumulated deductions applied by the High Court during the course of making an assessment of the market value of the acquired land.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 524 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

A.P. Housing Board vs K. Manohar Reddy & Ors on 30 September, 2010

27. Our conclusions in respect of the quantum of permissible deductions have been recorded in paragraphs 18 and 19 hereinabove. While determining the validity of individual deductions, it is also imperative to examine whether or not the total deductions put together fall within legal parameters. We have upheld 55 percent deduction accorded by the High Court towards "development". We have also individually upheld deduction of 10 percent on account of "de-escalation", as also, the deduction of 5 percent on account of "waiting period". Cumulatively these deductions would amount to 70 percent (55+10+5=70). The outer benchmark for deductions laid down by this Court in Lal Chand's case (supra) and in Andhra Pradesh Housing Board's case (supra) is 75 percent. Cumulatively also the deduction allowed by the High Court, fall well within the parameters laid down by this Court. We therefore find no infirmity in the quantum of accumulated deductions applied by the High Court during the course of making an assessment of the market value of the acquired land.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 98 - M Sharma - Full Document

Spl.Land Acquisition Officer & Anr vs M.K.Rafiq Saheb on 5 July, 2011

17. It is essential to earmark appropriate deductions, out of the market value of an exemplar land, for each of the two components referred to above. This would be the first step towards balancing the differential factors. This would pave the way for determining the market value of the undeveloped acquired land on the basis of market value of the developed exemplar land.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 115 - Full Document

Delhi Development Authority vs Bali Ram Sharma And Ors. on 3 August, 2004

Insofar as the contention advanced at the hands of the learned counsel for the appellants on the issue of deduction under the head of "de-escalation" is concerned, reference may be made to the decision rendered by this Court in Delhi Development Authority Vs. Bali Ram Sharma, (2004) 6 SCC 533, wherein this Court found it appropriate to allow annual escalation, at the rate of 10 per cent, in order to determine the market value of the acquired land.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 69 - S V Patil - Full Document

Brig. Sahib Singh Kalha And Ors. vs Amritsar Improvement Trust And Ors. on 1 October, 1981

As far back as in 1982, this Court in Brigadier Sahib Singh Kalha's case (supra) held, that the permissible deduction could be upto 53 percent. This deduction was divided by the Court into two components. For the "first component" referred to in the foregoing paragraph, it was held that a deduction of 20 percent should be made. For the "second component", it was held that the deduction could range between 20 to 33 percent. It is therefore apparent, that a deduction of upto 53 percent was the norm laid down by the Court as far back as in 1982. The aforesaid norm remained unchanged for a long duration of time, even though, keeping in mind the peculiar facts and circumstances emerging from case to case, different deductions were applied by this Court to balance the differential factors between the exemplar land and the acquired land. Recently however, this 14 Court has approved a higher component of deduction.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 180 - A P Sen - Full Document
1   2 Next