Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.19 seconds)
Gopal Singh And Ors. vs Collector And Ors. on 20 January, 2004 cites

Pal Singh And Others vs Union Territory Of Chandigarh on 8 September, 1992

In Pal Singh and Ors. v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, 1993 (1) UPLBEC 137, Supreme Court has observed that the judgment of a Court in Land Acquisition case determining the market value of land in the vicinity of acquired land even though not inter-parties, and no doubt admitted in evidence either as an instance or one from which the market value of the acquired land could be deduced or inferred. But it must be proved by the person relying upon such judgment by adducing evidence with due regard being given to all the attending facts and circumstances. In the case in hand as discussed above, it is clear that for the plots towards south of the disputed plot, compensation has been awarded at the rate of Rs. 30 per sq. yard. The plots towards north of the disputed plot, compensation at the rate of Rs. 20 per sq. yard has been awarded. All these plots have been acquired under the same notification for the same purpose. Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case and also keeping in mind the attending circumstances the fixation of compensation at the rate of Rs. 25 per sq. yard will meet the end of Justice.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 99 - N Venkatachala - Full Document

Mehta Ravindrarai Ajitrai (Deceased) ... vs State Of Gujarat on 8 August, 1989

It has been held by Supreme Court in Mehta Ravindradrary Ajit Rai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1989 SC 2051, that where sale of land adjacent to acquired land was cited as an instance for determination of market value, the same cannot be altogether ignored merely because it was the past acquisition sale when there was no evidence indicating that there was sharp or speculative rise of the land after acquisition.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 51 - M H Kania - Full Document
1