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

1992 Supreme(AP) 112

IYYAPU PANDURANGA RAO, G.RADHA KRISHNA RAO
Special Deputy Collector – Appellant
Versus
E. Jagga Reddy – Respondent


G. RADHAKRISHNA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE land admeasuring Ac. 70-02 gts. was acquired for the purpose of excavation of Kakatiya Canal DBM 16 at K. M. 15. It is a dry land and possession was taken on 25-5-81. 4 (1) Notification was published on 6-5-82 and the award was passed on 1-8-84. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded at the rate of rs. 6,250/- per acre. Ex. B-1 is the award that has been marked on behalf of the land Acquisition Officer.

( 2 ) WHEN the matter was referred to the lower court under Section 18 of the act, the lower court awarded at the rate of Rs. 20000 per acre. Aggrieved by the same, the State has come up in appeal.

( 3 ) THE lower court after considering the documents, particularly Exs. A-8 and a-9 which were proved through P. Ws. 2, 3 and 4 came to the conclusion that rs. 20,000/ - per acre would be the reasonable compensation that can be granted for the lands that have been acquired, and double the compensation for wells granted by the L. A. O. P. W. 1 is the retired Dy. Executive Engineer who deposed that he has inspected about 7 wells on the request made by the claimants and exs. A~l to A-7 are the estimates prepared by him. P. W. 2 is claimant No. 5 and p. W. 3 i


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