Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.48 seconds)
The Special Deputy Collector vs Bolleddula Mahanandi Pathi on 17 October, 2024 cites

Om Prakash (D) By Lrs. & Ors vs Union Of India & Anr on 5 August, 2004

In Om Prakash case referred to supra, the Hon'ble Supreme Court was dealing with an appeal filed against the order of the High Court of Delhi. While working out fair market value of the subject matter lands in question on the basis of Rs.16,750/- per bigha as on 30.10.1963, the High Court keeping in view that in several judgments of the Apex Court escalation at different and varying rates i.e., 6% p.a from 1959 to 1965, 10% p.a from 1996 to 1993 and @ 12% p.a. from 1975 onwards had been considered to be reasonable, adopted escalation of market value @ 12% p.a and the same was upheld. In the present case, undisputedly there is increased potentiality of the land by virtue of Telugu Ganga Project. This Court see no illegality in the order of the Reference 4 (2004) 10 SCC 627 9 LAAS_368_2015 & LAAS_257_281_2014 Court in following the said decision, in respect of the lands acquired in the year 2003. At any rate, the contention of the learned Government Pleader that the escalation at 12% by the Reference Court in respect of the subject matter lands amounts to "enhancement on enhancement" cannot be appreciated in the light of the fact that there is always trend of increase in the land prices more particularly in respect of the lands of this nature.
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 63 - Full Document

Charan Dass (Dead) By Lrs vs H.P. Housing Urban Dev. Authority & Ors on 7 September, 2009

10. The learned Reference Court by taking into consideration the evidence on record more particularly Ex.B.1 i.e., the order of the High Court fixing the compensation at Rs.65,000/- per acre, in respect of the lands acquired earlier, which were situate in the neighboring Thimmapuram Village, felt it appropriate to fix the compensation at Rs.65,000/- per acre in respect of the subject matter lands. In fact, it had also relied on Ex.B.2, which supports contention of the respondents/claimants that the lands in question and the lands which were acquired in the year 1985 are situate in the adjoining Villages. The learned Reference Court by relying on the decision in Charan Dass (supra) had opined that the Awards passed in respect of the lands in the same Village or neighbouring Villages can be accepted as valid, more particularly as there are no comparable sales in respect of the subject matter Village, even as per the observation of the LAO. Such an approach of the learned Reference Court is based on well settled legal position.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 202 - D K Jain - Full Document

Som Prakash Rekhi vs Union Of India & Anr on 13 November, 1980

11. The learned counsel for the appellant also argued that the learned Reference Court went wrong in taking the escalation of market value at 12% per annum in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Om Prakash v. Union of India4, in the facts of the present case. We are not inclined to accept the same. While the acquisition of lands in Thimmapuram Village was in the year 1985, Section 4(1) Notification in respect of the land under acquisition was issued in the year 2003. Thus, there is time gap of more than 18 years as observed by the learned Reference Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 56 - Cited by 406 - V R Iyer - Full Document
1