Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.25 seconds)The Kerala State Electricity Board vs Livisha Etc. Etc on 18 May, 2007
15. Insofar as the compensation for the pomegranate trees, the appellants
have placed reliance on the judgment of this Court dated 29.11.2016, in C.A.
Nos.11404-11405 of 2016. Planting, raising and making commercial use of
Page No. 7 of 10
CA NO. ….. OF 2017 @ SLP (C) NO.30562 OF 2016
fruit bearing trees is a painstaking affair and cost of the same is consistently
on rise as the years are passing by which is to be kept in view. Award of
compensation in relation to fruit bearing trees depends on facts and
circumstances of each case. It has been held in Kerala State Electricity
Board v. Livisha and Ors. (2007) 6 SCC 792, in the following terms:
Land Acquisition Officer, A. P vs Kamadana Ramakrishna Rao & Anr on 7 February, 2007
“11. So far as the compensation in relation to fruit bearing trees are
concerned the same would also depend upon the facts and circumstances
of each case. We may, incidentally, refer to a recent decision of this Court
in Land Acquisition Officer v. Kamandana Ramakrishna Rao AIR 2007 SC
1142 wherein claim on yield basis has been held to be relevant for
determining the amount of compensation payable under the Land
Acquisition Act, same principle has been reiterated in Kapur Singh Mistry
v. Financial Commission and Revenue Secretary to Govt. of Punjab and
Ors. , State of Haryana v. Gurcharan Singh and Anr. [1995] 1 SCR 408,
and Airports Authority of India v. Satyagopal Roy [2002] 2 SCR 505.”
State Of Haryana vs Gurcharan Singh & Anr. Etc on 18 January, 1995
“11. So far as the compensation in relation to fruit bearing trees are
concerned the same would also depend upon the facts and circumstances
of each case. We may, incidentally, refer to a recent decision of this Court
in Land Acquisition Officer v. Kamandana Ramakrishna Rao AIR 2007 SC
1142 wherein claim on yield basis has been held to be relevant for
determining the amount of compensation payable under the Land
Acquisition Act, same principle has been reiterated in Kapur Singh Mistry
v. Financial Commission and Revenue Secretary to Govt. of Punjab and
Ors. , State of Haryana v. Gurcharan Singh and Anr. [1995] 1 SCR 408,
and Airports Authority of India v. Satyagopal Roy [2002] 2 SCR 505.”
Airports Authority Of India vs Satyagopal Roy & Others on 15 March, 2002
“11. So far as the compensation in relation to fruit bearing trees are
concerned the same would also depend upon the facts and circumstances
of each case. We may, incidentally, refer to a recent decision of this Court
in Land Acquisition Officer v. Kamandana Ramakrishna Rao AIR 2007 SC
1142 wherein claim on yield basis has been held to be relevant for
determining the amount of compensation payable under the Land
Acquisition Act, same principle has been reiterated in Kapur Singh Mistry
v. Financial Commission and Revenue Secretary to Govt. of Punjab and
Ors. , State of Haryana v. Gurcharan Singh and Anr. [1995] 1 SCR 408,
and Airports Authority of India v. Satyagopal Roy [2002] 2 SCR 505.”
State Of Nagaland vs Lipok Ao & Ors on 1 April, 2005
In State of Nagaland v. Lipok AO and
Others (2005) 3 SCC 752: 2005 (4) JT 10, it was held as under:-
Section 5 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 18 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 54 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Shaik Imambi vs Spl.Dy.Collector.(Land ... on 2 February, 2011
“10. There is no specific documentary evidence in regard to the actual
income from the orchard. As the reports of experts of the state
government assessed the gross annual income from each tree as
Rs.150-200/-, it would be appropriate to take the average thereof, namely
Rs.175/- as the annual income per tree in this case. If Rs.35/- is deducted
towards the cost of cultivation and other expenses as recommended by
the experts, the net annual income would have been Rs.140/- per tree or
Rs.1,06,540/- for 761 trees.”
Applying the ratio of the above decision, Rs.250/- is awarded as the annual
income per tree. Compensation of Rs.100/- per each lime tree enhanced to
Rs.250/- is awarded.
1