S.C.MATHUR, R.K.AGRAWAL
RAM JIYAWAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent
( 1 ) THESE petitions arise from proceedings to acquire land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), for short Act. Common questions of law have been raised and, therefore, the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The facts stated in the judgment have been taken from Writ Petition No. 545 of 1991 in which short counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Land Acquisition Officer.
( 2 ) THE facts generally stated in these petitions are as follows:-notification under Section 4 was issued and thereafter declaration under Section 6 was made. Section 17 was applied and possession of the notified land was taken by the Collector before publication of the award. At the time of taking possession there were trees and standing crops on the land and they were damaged but no compensation was paid for such damage at the time possession was taken and compensation for such damage was not included even in the final award. Notice was issued under Section 9 (1) and the petitioners preferred claims for compensation. No date was fixed for hearing of the claims and the award was published in the absence of the
Dr. Angelo Fer-nandes v. Union of India
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Radhey Shyam Nigam
Smt. Saroj Kumari v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Shivdev Singh v. The State of Bihar
E. Ramasubbareddy v. State of A.P.
State of Tamil Nadu v. P. Kanagamani
Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. The Deputy Land Acquisition Officer
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.