Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (1.63 seconds)
Land Acquisition Collector & Ors vs Smt. Kanta Devi on 23 July, 2018 cites

Kasturi & Ors vs State Of Haryana on 12 November, 2002

In Kasturi v. State of Haryana, 2003 1 SCC 354 the Court held: (SCC pp. 359-60, para 7) "7. It is well settled that in respect of agricultural land or undeveloped land which has potential value for housing or commercial purposes, normally 1/3rd amount of compensation has to be deducted out of the amount of compensation payable on the acquired land subject to certain variations depending on its nature, location, extent of expenditure involved for development and the area required for road and other civic amenities to develop the land so as to make the plots for residential or commercial purposes. A land may be plain or uneven, the soil of the land may be soft or hard bearing on the foundation for the purpose of making construction; maybe the land is situated in the midst of a developed area all around but that land may have a hillock or may be low-lying or may be having deep ditches. So the amount of expenses that may be incurredin developing the area also varies.....................There may be various factual factors which may have to be taken into consideration while applying the cut in payment of compensation towards developmental charges, maybe in some cases it is more than 1/3rd and in some cases less than 1/3rd. It must be remembered that there is difference between a developed area and an area having potential value, which is yet to be developed. The fact that an area is developed or adjacent to a developed area will not ipso facto make every land situated in the area also developed to be valued as a building site orplot, particularly when vast tracts are acquired, as in this case, for development purpose.'
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 293 - S V Patil - Full Document

Spl. Tehsildar Land Acqn. ... vs Smt. A. Mangala Gowri on 9 August, 1991

36. While determining the market value of the acquired land, normally one- third deduction i.e. 33 1/3% towards development charges is allowed. One- third deduction towards development was allowed in Tehsildar (LA) v. A.Mangala Gowri, 1991 4 SCC 218, Gulzara Singh v. State of Punjab, 1993 4 SCC 245, Santosh Kumari v. State of Haryana, 1996 10 SCC 631, Revenue Divl.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 419 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Deputy Director Land Acquisition vs Malla Atchinaidu And Ors on 12 December, 2006

37. Depending on the nature and location of the acquired land, extent of land required to be set apart and expenses involved for development, 30% to 50% deduction towards development was allowed in Haryana State Agricultural Market Board v. Krishan Kumar, 2011 15 SCC 297, Director, Land Acquisition v. Malla Atchinaidu, 2006 12 SCC 87, Mummidi Apparao v. Nagarjuna Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., 2009 4 SCC 402 and Lal Chand v. Union of India, 2009 15 SCC 769.
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 84 - A R Lakshmanan - Full Document
1   2 3 Next