ANIL KSHETARPAL
Shanti Sarup – Appellant
Versus
Land Acquisition Collector – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Anil Kshetarpal, J. (Oral). - The hearing of the case was held through video conferencing on account of restricted functioning of the Courts.
The appellants pray for condoning the delay of 6313 days (more than 17 years) in filing the appeal. The land owned by the predecessors of the appellants located in Village Khandsa, Tehsil and District Gurugram, has been acquired for public purposes, namely, for industrial, residential, construction of roads and retention of green-belts in Sector 37, Gurugram, vide notification dated 22.07.1996, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1894 Act”). The Land Acquisition Collector passed an Award No.10 dated 30.12.1998, while assessing the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.7,05,000/- per acre. The predecessors of the appellants along with other owners applied for reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which was duly referred to the Court of Additional District Judge, Gurugram. The aforesaid reference along with cases of various other owners who applied for reference were decided by the Additional District Judge vide an Award dated 27.08.2002. The predecessors of the ap
Balwant Singh (Dead) vs. Jagdish Singh and Others (2010) 8 SCC 685
Maniben Devraj Shah vs. Municipal Corporation of Brihan Mumbai AIR 2012 SC 1629
Manindra Land and Building Corporation Ltd. vs. Bhootnath Banerjee & Ors.
Parimal vs. Veena @ Bharti AIR 2011 SC 1150
Ram Nath Sao @ Ram Nath Sahu & Ors. vs. Gobardhan Sao & Ors.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.