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

1991 Supreme(SC) 360

RANGANATH MISRA, M. N. VENKATACHALIAH, N. P. SINGH, P. B. SAWANT, M. H. KANIA
State Of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Mohinder Singh Randhawa – Respondent


JUDGMENT

These appeals by special leave are at the instance of the State of Punjab and arise out of execution proceedings taken by the landowners to get their dues in terms of the decree made by the High Court in regard to compensation payable under the Land Acquisition Act.

2. Three contentions were canvassed at the hearing: (1) the payments stipulated under Section 23(1 A) of the Land Acquisition Act is not admissible: (2) solatium at enhanced rate of 30% cannot be calculated by taking into account the sum of money covered by Section 23(1A) of the Act; and (3) interest payable under Section 34 of the Act cannot take into account the interest component payable under the Act.

3. We find on reference to the appellate decree of High Court that it directed payment of the sum of money under Section 23(1A) of the Act. In the absence of any challenge to the appellate decree in further proceedings, in execution this is not open to challenge.

4. On the other two aspects raised, counsel for the respondents has fairly told us that the direction of the High Court cannot be sustained.

Section 23(1 A) provides

"In addition to the market value of the land, as above provided, the Court shall in every








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