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

1995 Supreme(SC) 1122

B.L.HANSARIA, K.RAMASWAMY
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Munsha – Respondent


Advocates:
A.Subhashini, ASHOK MATHUR, K.N.Shukla, Niranjana Singh, SANJAY SARIN

( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) THIS appeal by special leave arises from the judgment and order dated 5/3/1993 passed in CWP No. 316 of 1993 by the High court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The competent authority, viz. , the Special Land Acquisition Collector made an award under Section 8 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (for short the Act) and awarded compensation Rs. 375. 00 per kanal. This was done as early as in 1970. In 1986, Civil Writ Petition No. 2391 of 1986 was filed by the respondents for appointment of an arbitrator. The High court allowed the writ petition on 28/7/19866 and directed the appellants to appoint an arbitrator. The arbitrator thus appointed, by his award dated 12/12/1991 determined compensation Rs. 150. 00 per maria. He also awarded solatium 30% and interest 9% per annum for one year and on expiry thereof 15% on the enhanced compensation. Aggrieved by the said award, the appellants filed an appeal in the High court which was dismissed on 20/5/1992. A Letters Patent Appeal, viz. , 392 of 1992, was filed against the said order of the learned Single Judge and the same is pending in the High court. Since the respondents ch








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