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

1996 Supreme(SC) 1523

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
Agricultural Produce Market Committee: Land Acquisition Officer – Appellant
Versus
Land Acquisition Officer And Assistant Commissioner: R. R. Hanmantanawar – Respondent


( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) WE have heard learned counsel on both sides.

( 3 ) NOTIFICATION under Section 4 (1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) was published on 14/4/1977 acquiring an extent of 3 acres 34 gunthas, 1 acre 2 gunthas for extension of Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee, Gadag in Dharwad District of Karnataka State. The Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) by his award dated 23/1/1982 determined the compensation at the rate of Re 0. 76 per square foot. On reference, the Civil Judge, Gadag in his award dated 29/11/1982 enhanced the compensation to Rs. 8. 50 per square foot. On appeal under Section 54, in the impugned judgments dated 7/10/1992 and 4/11/1992 in MFA No. 837 of 1987 and MFA No. 1962 of 1987 respectively, the High court of Karnataka reduced the compensation to Rs. 7. 00 per square foot. Thus, these appeals by special leave.

( 4 ) THE Reference court and the High court relied on three sale instances of an extent of 38. 4 square feet and 87. 35 square feet which worked out at the rate of Rs. 8. 00 and Rs. 19. 98 per square foot; another sale deed of 78 square feet was worked out at the rate of Rs. 31. 25 per square foot. The question, is wh

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