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

2007 Supreme(Kar) 547

N.KUMAR
VASUDAVE – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT – Respondent


KUMAR, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners are the owners of lands which was the subject matter of acquisition for the purpose of Upper Krishna Project along with the lands belonging to other owners.

( 2 ) PETITIONERS did not oppose the acquisition. Final notifications came to be passed, award also came to be passed. They did not seek a reference claiming higher compensation. However, some of the land owners who were dis-satisfied with the amount awarded, sought reference to the Civil Court under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition act (For short hereinafter referred to as "l. A. Act" ). One such case was LAC 469/00. The Civil Court referred the matter to Lok Adalat. hi the Lok Adalat, the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer was modified and the compensation was enhanced and an award came to be passed on 20. 2. 2002. On coming to know of the said award where compensation was enhanced, these petitioners who had not sought reference under Sec. 18 of the L. A. Act, filed applications under Section 28-A of the L. A. Act seeking re-determination of the compensation in terms of the award passed before the Lok Adalat. The said request of the petitioners was rejected by the Land Acquisition of
















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