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

2010 Supreme(SC) 1021

Chimanlal Kuberdas Modi – Appellant
Versus
Gujarat Industrial Development Corp. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J.

1. The only issue which arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether or not the appellant would be entitled to payment of interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the solatium on the compensation paid in terms of the decision of the case in Sunder Vs. Union of India reported in (2001) 7 SCC 211 and further explained in the case of Gurpreet Singh Vs. Union of India reported in (2006) 8 SCC 457.

2. The land belonging to the appellant was acquired by issuing a notification under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). A notification was issued on 4.10.1973 for the beneficiary, namely, Respondent No. 1 under Section 4 of the Act. Thereafter another notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued by the competent authority on 4.11.1976. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an Award in the land acquisition case wherein he determined the market value of the land at `1.28 per sq. meter. Possession of the land was also taken over by the Land Acquisition Officer on the date of the passing of the Award. Pursuant to the aforesaid Award, the appellant was paid an amount of ` 73,























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