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

2016 Supreme(SC) 43

KURIAN JOSEPH, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
Arun Manohar Dange – Appellant
Versus
Special Land Acquisition Officer, Raigad, alibag – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

Kurian, J.

Leave granted.

2. The issue pertains to the determination of just compensation for the land acquired from the appellants. The dispute is in a narrow compass as to whether there should be 75% deduction for development charges. The reasons stated by the High Court in paragraph 12 of the impugned Judgment reads as follows :-

"12. Now the question is what should be the deduction made for arriving at the market value of the acquired land on the basis of the market value reflected from Exhibit 32. The rate of market value reflected from Exhibit 32 is Rs. 381/- per sq. meter. The area of the acquired and is very large -9900 sq. meters. There were no internal roads or drainage lines on the acquired land. Apart from the largeness of the acquired land, a substantial deduction will have to be made on account of cost of development. The decision in the case of Bhagwathula Samanna (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants will not help him as in the facts of the case, the land was acquired for housing purposes and the finding of fact was that there were roads, electricity and drainage facilities in the nearby locality. Deduction on account of deve






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