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

1991 Supreme(SC) 7

L.M.SHARMA, M.M.PUNCHHI
Sher Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates:
D.K.GARG, GOBINDA MUKHOTY, K.C.Sharma, Mahabir Singh, PREM MALHOTRA, R.C.KAUSHIK, R.P.BHATT, S.P.GOYAL

JUDGMENT

PUNCHHI, J.:—This bunch of appeals and special leave petitions are at the instance of the dissatisfied land owners whose lands were acquired in bulk by the State of Haryana, in the town of Hissar, for establishing a residential-cum-commercial complex.

2. The land totalled approximately 331 acres. The Land Acquisition Collector appointed to determine the compensation belted the land in three parts awarding for block A compensation at the rate of Rs. 4.13 per sq. yd.; for block B at the rate of Rs. 2.43 per sq. yd. and for block C at Rs. 1.65 per sq. yd. The dissatisfied claimants took the matter in reference to the Addl. District Judge, Hissar who maintained the belting, but raised the compensation for block A to Rs. 10 per sq. yd., block B to Rs. 6 per sq. yd. and block C to Rs. 4.50 per sq. yd.

3. When-the matter was taken up in First Appeal before the High Court, it was to wipe out C and confine it to belting A and B. The entire evidence was considered by the High Court meticulously to come to the conclusion that belt A should fetch compensation at the rate of Rs. 23/per sq. yd. and belt B Rs. 16 / - per sq. yd. Still not satisfied the claimants/appellants by special leave





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