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

1970 Supreme(AP) 280

A.SEETHARAM REDDY, K.RAMASWAMY
Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Visakhapatnam – Appellant
Versus
P. Narasing Rao – Respondent


K. RAMASWAMY, J.

( 1 ) THE appeal and the Cross-objections reflect the dissatisfaction by the Requisitioning Authority as well as the claimants in determining the compensation in respect of the lands situated in Block No. 4 of Waltair Ward in Visakhapatnam Municipality. , By notification issued under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act (1 of 1894 ). (for short, "the Act",) dated June 23, 1966, an extent of Ac. 5. 37897 sq. "feet in T S No 44 was acquired for planned development of Visakhapatnam municipality. By award dated November 23, 1968, the appellant determined compensation at Rs. 2. 22ps. per sq. yard. He deducted 1/3rd therefrom towards developmental expenses. Rs. 1. 48 Ps. per sq. yard was ultimately awarded, though the claimants laid claim at Rs. 16/- per sq. yard. Dissatisfied there with, the claimants sought for a reference under Section 18 of the Act to the Civil Court. The respondents adduced oral and documentary evidence. Exs. A-1 to A-6 are the sale-deeds. P. Ws. 1 to 3 were examined. The Land acquisition Officer was examined himself as R. W. 1 but adduced no documentary evidence. The lower court rejected the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the respo














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