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

1993 Supreme(Del) 342

MOHD.SHAMIM, SUNANDA BHANDARE
UNION OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
JITENDER SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
DIPAK KHOSLA, MUKUL ROHTAGI, SASHI KIRAN

Ms. Sunanda Bhandare, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the Additional District Judge, Delhi dated 9/07/1984read with Order dated 15/02/1990 in LAC Case No. 81 of 1981. Thebrief facts are as follows :-

( 2 ) THE land belonging to respondents No. 3 to 6 in village Tughlakabad, New Delhi was acquired by Notification issued under Section 4 of theland Acquisition Act dated 5/07/1973. The declaration under Section 6was issued on 12/08/1975. The Land Acquisition Collector gave hisaward on 8/02/1979 and fixed the market value at Rs. 3000. 00 perbigha. A Reference petition was filed under Section 18 of the Act and theadditional District Judge fixed the market value of the land at Rs. 49,00 0. 00per bigha. The Additional District Judge, however, in his order of 9/07/1984 had not given benefit of interest under the amended Act to the respondents No. 3 to 6. These respondents filed a review petition before the Additional District Judge for amendment of the decree praying that solatium andinterest be awarded at an enhanced rate. Therefore, the Additional Districtjudge passed the order of 15/02/1990 and allowed the review petition. This appeal has been filed by t







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