Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.28 seconds)Land Acquisition Zone Officer vs Damberudhar Pradhan And Ors. on 29 April, 1991
"......Our attention has been invited to a Division Bench decision of the High Court of Orissa in Land Acquisition Zone Officer v. Damberudhar Pradhan, AIR 1991 Orissa 271 wherein on a conspectus of decided case, the Division Bench has held that 16 years purchase was ideal to be adopted for fixing the market value of the land in Orissa. The High Court has adopted the same multiplier for this case. We do not find any therewith, in the facts and circumstances of the case and approve the same."
State Of Haryana vs Gurcharan Singh & Anr. Etc on 18 January, 1995
Referring to the views expressed in Gurcharan Singh's case (supra) Supreme Court held that the High Court committed error apparent in awarding compensation adopting the multiplier of 18. But ultimately it did not interfere with the order in view of the small amount of compensation involved therein.
Airports Authority Of India vs Satyagopal Roy & Others on 15 March, 2002
In Airports Authority of India v. Satyagopal Roy (Supra) the High Court adopted a multiplier of 18.
The Executive Director vs Sarat Chandra Bisoi & Anr on 11 May, 2000
The said decision is being consistently followed and even the Supreme Court in the Executive Director v. Sarat Chandra Bisoi and Anr., AIR 2000 SC 2619, approved the said Division Bench decision of this Court.
Airport Authority Of India vs Satyagopal Roy And Ors. on 27 July, 2000
In Airports Authority of India v. Satyagopal Roy and Ors., AIR 2000 SC 1423, Supreme Court has reiterated the view adopted in Gurcharan Singh's case (supra).
Special Land Acquisition Officer, ... vs Sauri Charan Sahu on 18 June, 2002
Recently in Special Land Acquisition Officer, Rengali Irrigation Project, Dhenkanal v. Sauri Charan Sahu, 2002 (II) OLR 226 this Court has applied multiplier 16 in respect of the agricultural yield.
1