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

2016 Supreme(AP) 399

NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, ANIS
U. M. Ramudu – Appellant
Versus
Revenue Divisional Officer Cum The Land Acquisition Officer Adoni – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:K. Rajanna, Advocate.

Judgment :

Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J.

LAAS No.587 OF 2010

1. One bunch of appeals are preferred by the claimants under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 not being satisfied with the fixation of the market value at the rate of Rs.3,00,000/- per acre, subject to deduction of 1/3rd thereafter per acre towards development costs.

2. The other batch of appeals were preferred by the Land Acquisition Officer, aggrieved by the fixation of the market value at Rs.3,00,000/- per acre, subject to deduction of 1/3rd towards development charges, the net result of the market value working out to Rs.2,00,000/- per acre. Thus these cases are intricately connected to each other.

3. The facts lie in a very narrow compass. Initially, by a draft notification published under Section (1) of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, on 26.09.1998, an extent of Ac.41.88 cents of land in Yemmiganur Town, Kurnool District was proposed for acquisition for providing house sites to the weaker sections of the society. Quickly thereafter, another notification under Subsection (1) of Section 4 of the Land Acqu

































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