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

2000 Supreme(SC) 1721

A.P.MISRA, RUMA PAL
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER – Appellant
Versus
B. VIJENDER REDDY – Respondent


( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

( 2 ) THE present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31-7-1996 in Appeal No. 1560 of 1989 passed by the High Court of Andhra pradesh at Hyderabad.

( 3 ) THE questions raised by the appellant are: (A) Whether the High Court is justified in fixing the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs 90,000 per acre on the facts and circumstances of this case? (B) Whether the High Court is justified in placing reliance on exhibits A-1 and A-2, the sale deeds in which the respondents are the vendors?

( 4 ) IN order to appreciate the controversy, it is necessary to give short facts.

( 5 ) A notification under Section 4 (1) was issued on 19-2-1983 under the land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the acquisition of 9 acres of land in Chityal village of Warangal district for providing house sites to the weaker sections. On 18-6-1983 the possession of the said land was taken. The Land Acquisition Officer considering the various sale deeds fixed the market value of the land at the rate of Rs 10,000 per acre. The respondents not satisfied, preferred reference under Section 18 of the said Act. Th













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