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

1997 Supreme(SC) 768

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY, S.SAGHIR AHMAD
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
A. Ajit Singh – Respondent


ORDER

Substitution allowed.

Leave granted.

2. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the Delhi High Court, made on 18.8.1996, in RFA No. 87 of 1974.

3. The undisputed facts are that on January 25, 1949, the respondent was granted a lease of the Government land for 30 years with a right to further renewal from time to time, upto a maximum period of 99 years. Since the land was required for acquisition, notice was issued on July 23, 1960 terminating the tenancy of the respondent. The respondent filed an appeal before the Additional District Judge who held that the lease still subsisted and, therefore, the respondent could not be evicted. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act ) was published on February 17, 1967 acquiring the land for planned development of the City of Delhi. The Land Acquisition Officer gave his award on June 6, 1967 determining the compensation @ Rs. 4,000/- per bigha. On reference, the Additional District Judge, by his award and decree dated 2.11.1973 enhanced the compensation to Rs. 17,000/- per bigha; apportionment was also effected. On appeal by the State and by the claimant also, the High Court whi












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