S.N.VARIAVA, H.K.SEMA
RAMESH DUTTA – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
ORDER
1. This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court dated20-8-1997.
2. Briefly stated, the facts are as follows:
The appellant was running a poultry farm on land admeasuring approximately 10,000 sq feet in Village Bhatinda. On 6-4-1992 a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published proposing to acquire, amongst others, the land of the appellant. Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act was invoked and no-objections were invited under Section 5. The notification under Section 6 was issued on 8-4-1992. The appellant was then given a notice to vacate on 17-4-1993 and possession was taken on
21-4-1993.
3. The Deputy Director, Animal Husbandry by his report assessed the loss to the appellant. The report of the Deputy Director was reconsidered by the Director of Animal Husbandry who reassessed the loss caused to the appellant by his having to close down his poultry business at such short notice. Based on the reports and other material an award came to be a published on 3-6-1994 wherein apart from the compensation for the land, an amount was awarded towards loss of business.
4. On 6-6-1994 the Financial Commissioner grants post facto approval to the awar
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.