Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.29 seconds)Dadu Ram vs Land Acquisition Collector And Others on 29 March, 2016
9. It is no longer res-integra that when the land is
acquired for a purpose of single use, which has no relevance
with the nature and classification of land on the basis of its
agricultural potentiality, its value is not to be determined on the
basis of its nature and classification, but has to be determined on
the basis of purpose for which it has to be put in utilization after
acquisition, considering the entire land as a single unit, resulting
awarding of uniform rate to all kind of land acquired. (See Dadu
Ram Vs. Land Acquisition Collector and others (2016) 2 ILR
636 (HP); H.P. Housing Board Vs. Ram Lal and others, 2003
(3) Shim.L.C. 64; Union of India Vs. Harinder Pal Singh and
others 2005 (12) SCC 564; Executive Engineer and another
Vs. Dila Ram, Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 1007).
Himachal Pradesh Housing & vs M/S Kundan Lal Hari Ram & Company on 15 March, 2016
9. It is no longer res-integra that when the land is
acquired for a purpose of single use, which has no relevance
with the nature and classification of land on the basis of its
agricultural potentiality, its value is not to be determined on the
basis of its nature and classification, but has to be determined on
the basis of purpose for which it has to be put in utilization after
acquisition, considering the entire land as a single unit, resulting
awarding of uniform rate to all kind of land acquired. (See Dadu
Ram Vs. Land Acquisition Collector and others (2016) 2 ILR
636 (HP); H.P. Housing Board Vs. Ram Lal and others, 2003
(3) Shim.L.C. 64; Union of India Vs. Harinder Pal Singh and
others 2005 (12) SCC 564; Executive Engineer and another
Vs. Dila Ram, Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 1007).
Union Of India vs Harinder Pal Singh & Ors on 26 October, 2005
9. It is no longer res-integra that when the land is
acquired for a purpose of single use, which has no relevance
with the nature and classification of land on the basis of its
agricultural potentiality, its value is not to be determined on the
basis of its nature and classification, but has to be determined on
the basis of purpose for which it has to be put in utilization after
acquisition, considering the entire land as a single unit, resulting
awarding of uniform rate to all kind of land acquired. (See Dadu
Ram Vs. Land Acquisition Collector and others (2016) 2 ILR
636 (HP); H.P. Housing Board Vs. Ram Lal and others, 2003
(3) Shim.L.C. 64; Union of India Vs. Harinder Pal Singh and
others 2005 (12) SCC 564; Executive Engineer and another
Vs. Dila Ram, Latest HLJ 2008 (HP) 1007).
Special Land Acquisition Officer, ... vs Vasudev Chandrashankar & Anr. Etc on 8 April, 1997
base for determination of compensation. (See Special Land
Acquisition Officer Kheda and another Vs. Vasudev
Chandrashankar and another, (1997) 11 SCC 218).
Jai Prakash And Others vs Union Of India on 19 March, 1997
16. It is also settled law that in absence of exemplar
transactions of the same village, exemplar transactions of
adjoining villages can be taken into consideration and in case
there is evidence on record with regard to similarity of nature,
utility and potentiality of land, then same value of land of the said
village can be determined and in case there is no evidence with
regard to similarity of nature, utility and potentiality of land, the
exemplar transactions of adjoining village can be taken into
consideration, but the value of the land cannot be determined to
be the same and keeping in view the surrounding circumstances,
the value of land can be determined after making appropriate
deductions. (See Jai Prakash and others Vs. Union of India
(1997) 9 SCC 510, Kanwar Singh and others Vs. Union of
India (1998) 8 SCC 136 & Manoj Kumar Vs. State of Haryana
2017 SCC Online SC 1262).
Bhikulal Kedarmal Goenka (D) By L.Rs vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 28 July, 2016
22. The Apex Court in Bhikulal Kedarmal Goenka Vs.
State of Maharashtra and another (2016) 14 SCC 279, has
held that deduction from the determined market value of
acquired land, towards development charges, is not warranted
when no development required to be made for implementation of
public purpose, for which land is acquired.
The Land Acquisition Officer Revenue ... vs Smt. L. Kamalamma (Deed) By Trs. & Ors., ... on 19 January, 1998
It is also held by the
Apex Court in Land Acquisition Officer Revenue Divisional
Officer, Chittor Vs. L. Kamalamma (Smt.) dead by LRs and
others K. Krishnamachari and others (1998) 2 SCC 385, that
when no sales of large chunks of comparable land are available,
even land transactions in respect of smaller extent of land can be
taken note for determining the price of acquired land by making
appropriate deductions, such as, for development of land by
providing enough space for development of land to be carried on
::: Downloaded on - 30/08/2018 21:35:13 :::HCHP
22
RFA No. 390 of 2010 & connected matters
by the beneficiary like construction of roads, sewers, drains,
expenses involved in formation of a layout. In Atma Singh
.
Jitendra Kumar & Ors vs State Of Haryana & Anr on 11 December, 2007
(dead) through LRs. and others Vs. State of Haryana and
another (2008) 2 SCC 568, the Apex Court has held that for
assessing the market value of the land, the potentiality of the
acquired land should also be taken into consideration and
potentiality means capacity or possibility for changing or
developing into state of actuality and market value of a property
has to be determined having due regards to its existing
advantages and its potential possibility when utilized in its most
advantageous manner.
Trishala Jain & Anr vs State Of Uttaranchal & Anr on 5 May, 2011
23. The Apex Court after putting reliance on its earlier
pronouncement in Trishala Jain Vs. State of Uttranchal (2011) 6
SCC 47, in Vithal Rao and another Vs. Special Land
Acquisition Officer (2017) 8 SCC 558, has held that for
determining the true market value of the acquired land and
especially when the acquired land is a large chunk of
undeveloped land, it is the just and reasonable to make
appropriate deduction towards expenses for development of
acquired land and deductions should be made keeping in mind
the nature of land, area under acquisition, whether the land is
developed or not and, if so, to what extent, the purpose of
acquisition, etc. It has also been held that while determining the
market value of large chunk of land, when sale deeds of larger
parcel of land are not available, the value of smaller piece of land
can be taken into consideration after making proper deduction in
::: Downloaded on - 30/08/2018 21:35:13 :::HCHP
23
RFA No. 390 of 2010 & connected matters
the value of lands. It is further held that the Court should also
take into consideration the potentiality of acquired land apart
.