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

1993 Supreme(AP) 184

B.SUBHASHAN REDDY
P. Yellaiah – Appellant
Versus
Executive Engineer (PWD) (Randb) National Highway Suryapet Division – Respondent


B. SUBHASHAN REDDY, J.

( 1 ) IN this writ petition, the relief sought for is to grant the benefit of re-determination of compensation under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act on the analogy of the award passed for the similarly situated lands under the same notification.

( 2 ) MR. R. Narasimha Reddy, the learned Government Pleader strenuously contends that O. P. No. 4/76 was decided on 31-3-1981 and as such, the same has to be construed as the date of Award as contemplated under Section 3 (d) of the Land Acquisition Act. If that is the only factor, I have got to accept his contention and straightway dismiss the writ petition. But, some of the claimants in O. P. No. 4/76, who were set ex parte have filed a petition under LA. No. 427/88 invoking the provisions of Order 9 Rule 13 to set aside the order and the same was allowed. Restoring the claim, the Court of Subordinate Judge, Nalgonda has passed an Award on 6-12-1988 enhancing the compensation on the analogy of other claimants in the said O. P. which was already confirmed by this court on 17-8-1988. The beneficial legislation like this, where Section 28-A was incorporated by amending Act, 68/84 on the touch-stone of Article 1




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