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

1960 Supreme(Ori) 119

R.L.NARASIMHAM, S.BARMAN
KASINATH MUKHERJI – Appellant
Versus
COLLECTOR OF PURI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.K.Rai

NARASIMHAM, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal from the judgment of the Additional District Judge of Puri rejecting a reference made by the appellant-claimant, under Section 18 of the land Acquisition Act against the award of the Collector of Puri. . 252 acres of homestead lands of the appellant appertaining to plot Nos. 1712, 1713 and 1714 in the town of Bhubaneswar close to the famous temple of Lord Lingaraj were acquired by the Collector for the improvement of another Temple known as chitrakarani Temple which lies adjacent to the acquired plots. The said Temple is under the management of the Archeological Department of the government of India. The acquisition was made in two instalments. The first one was on 10th November 1947 when 126 acres were acquired and the second one was on the 14th September 1949, when the remaining 126 acres were acquired. The claimant had used the plots for the purpose of storing sugar-cane presses which he used to let out on hire to cultivators. There was a stone wall on one side with wooden planks on three sides. The Collector, in giving his award estimated the compensation at Rs. 7000/- per acre for homestead and Rs. 900/- for the structures standing on







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