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

1995 Supreme(SC) 747

K.RAMASWAMY, K.S.PARIPOORNAN
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Sunil Chandra Saha – Respondent


Advocates:
A.S.NAMBIYAR, ANIL KATIYAR, K.K.GUPTA, L.K.GUPTA, N.R.CHAUDHARY, Sanjay Parikh, SOM NATH MUKHERJI, T.C.SHARMA, T.SHRIDHARN

ORDER

1. Leave granted in the SLPs.

2. We do not propose to express any opinion on merits. Suffice it to state that neither the claimants nor the Land Acquisition Officer had adduced any legally admissible evidence in proof of the market value prevailing as on the date of notification or in rebuttal. The appellants-beneficiaries are entitled to a notice and participation in the award inquiry as well as in the reference and could adduce evidence in rebuttal to the claim of higher compensation. Unfortunately, the appellants had no notice nor an opportunity to adduce evidence. Both the claimants and the Land Acquisition Officer merely marked the sale deeds without examining either the vendor or the vendee to bring on record the circumstances in which the sale deeds came to be executed, the distance of the lands to the acquired lands, the nature of the respective lands and whether they would offer comparable sales to determine just and fair market value to the acquired lands. In the absence of such relevant and material evidence it would be difficult to determine compensation in respect of the acquired lands. The appeals are allowed accordingly. The award and decree of the reference cour



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