SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 466

K.RAMASWAMY, G.B.PATTANAIK
Shimla Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Asha Rani – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

We have heard the counsel on both sides.

These appeals by special leave arise from the order of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla made on June 6, 1995 in W.P. No. 88/95. The admitted facts are that the respondent had applied under Self-Finance Scheme in 1986 for allotment of the flats. The respondent had deposited a sum of Rs. 13,800/- for A type house. On November 13, 1986, the respondent was informed that she had to pay a tentative cost of Rs. 1,44,000/- which included earnest money of Rs. 13,800/- already deposited. In other words, she was required to deposit Rs. 1,30,200/- in installments stated in the letter. Thereafter, she was informed by letter dated November 1991 that cost of construction had been increased, on account of the hike in prices of the material, to Rs. 2,73,332 as against Rs. 1,44,000/-; and she was directed to pay the balance amount in the manner indicated in the letter. On reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the District Judge by his award and decree dated April 30, 1993 enhanced the compensation payable to the land acquired for the construction of flats under the Self Finance Scheme. Consequently, by the le



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top