Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (1.86 seconds)Shri Ved Pal Mor, Manager 'A' Grade, ... vs The State Of Haryana And Ors. on 7 October, 1998
The learned court below has granted increase on the value as
assessed in Ved Pal's case (supra) @ 12% per annum, which is the normal increase
granted for any time gap in two acquisitions in case the value is assessed on the
basis of the value of the land determined for any earlier acquisition. No fault as
such can be found with the principle so applied by the learned court below. The
method by which the land owners are seeking enhancement of compensation will
not be safe to be relied upon as no sale transaction as such has been referred to by
the land owners to justify their claim. The sale deeds, which have been produced
on record by the land owners, pertain to small plots, which may be located either
on road or in abadi, whereas the acquisition is for a big chunk of land measuring
46.04 acres. To justify increase at an abnormal rate, the land owners were
required to produce cogent evidence of the actual sale transactions in the area
regarding comparative land, which has not been done in the present case.
Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Sahaswan ... vs Bipin Kumar & Anr on 7 January, 2004
In the alternative, it was submitted that keeping in view the strategic
location, future potential and the fact that the area in the vicinity was being
developed after acquisition starting from the year 1992, the land owners should not
be granted increase for the intervening period merely @ 12% per annum, rather, it
should be atleast 15% per annum. Reliance was placed upon Krishi Utpadan
Mandi Samiti Sahaswan District Badaun v. Bipin Kumar and another etc., 2004(1)
SCC 283. Last but not the least, while summing up his contentions, learned
counsel for the land owners submitted that the learned court below even though
calculated the amount of compensation while granting increase @12% per annum
at ` 603/- per square yard, but rounded off the same to ` 600/- per square yard,
R.F.A. No. 1664 of 2009 [7]
which should have been on the higher side and not the lower.
Section 6 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 18 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
1