Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.30 seconds)Section 4 in The Coinage Act, 2011 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in The Coinage Act, 2011 [Entire Act]
Periyar And Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd vs State Of Kerala on 6 September, 1990
7. No doubt, as contended by Shri Tamba in case of fixation of the market value some sort of guess work is permissible. However, the guess work has to be made based on the material found on record and this has been sufficiently clarified by the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Periyar and Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd. v. State of Kerala (supra) wherein the Supreme Court has observed that it is the paramount duty of the courts of facts to subject the evidence to close scrutiny, objectively assess the evidence tendered by the parties on proper considerations thereof in correct perspective to arrive at a reasonahle market value. The Honourable Supreme Court has further observed that the attending facts and circumstances in each case would furnish guidance to arrive at the market value of the acquired lands and that the object of the assessment of the evidence is to arrive at a fair and reasonable market value of the lands and in that process sometimes trench on the border of the guess work but mechanical assessment has to be eschewed. In the impugned judgment we do not find any basis disclosed for the purpose of guesswork in arriving at the enhanced rate of compensation. The sole reasoning disclosed in the impugned judgment for such guess work is found in para 3 thereof which reads as under:
P. Ram Reddy vs Land Acquisition Officer, Hyderabad ... on 19 April, 1993
6. As rightly contended by the learned Addl.Govt.pleader, the sale deed in question has not been proved as required under the law and applying the test laid down in the matter of P. Ram Reddy and Ors. v. Land Acquisition Officer, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Hyderabad and Ors. (supra) no reliance can he placed on the sale deed in question produced by the respondent.
Chimanlal Hargovinddas vs Special Land Acquisition Officer, ... on 21 July, 1988
10. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed. The impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge in First Appeal No. 115/87 dated 12th January, 1990 as well as the Award dated 30th June, 1987 passed by the learned District Judge, Margao In Land Acquisition Case No. 18/85 are hereby set aside. In the circumstances there shall be no order at to costs. The amount deposited by the appellant in this Court be refunded to the appellant along with interest, if any, accrued thereon by issuing necessary cheque/draft in favour of the Special Land Acquisition Officer, South as prayed for by the learned Addl. Government Advocate, Shri H.R. Bharne.
Smt. Saraswati Devi And Others vs U.P. Government And Another on 15 May, 1992
The judgment of the Apex Court in Saraswati Devi's case (supra) has no application to the case in hand.
1