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

1976 Supreme(SC) 43

P.K.GOSWAMI, S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI
State Of Madras – Appellant
Versus
A. M. Nanjan – Respondent


Advocates:
A.Subhashini, A.V.RANGAM, LAL NARAIN SINHA, M.NATESAN, S.GOPALAKRISHNA IYER

JUDGMENT

GOSWAMI, J.:—The only question that arises for consideration in these appeals by certificate of the High Court of Judicature at Madras relates to the quantum of compensation with regard to acquisition of 18.34 acres of land in Mulligoor village, Nilgiris District, belonging to the respondents.

2. The land in question was acquired for the purpose of a hydroelectric scheme at Kundah. A Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was duly published on May 1, 1957. This land was purchased by the respondents father by a sale deed (Ext. B-1) of February 22, 1951, for a consideration of Rs.4,218/4/- from the Nilgiris Wattle Plantations Limited. The rate at which the purchase was made was Rs.230/- per acre. The Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.500/- per acre. On a reference at the instance of the claimants (respondents herein) the Subordinate Judge raised the compensation to Rs.1800/- per acre. The State as well as the claimants appealed to the High Court against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge. By a common judgment the High Court dismissed the State s appeal and partly allowed the claimants appeal by raising the rate of co














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