Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dr. A.D. Maria Clete, J
Union Of India, Rep., By Secretary To Government (Revenue), Pondicherry – Appellant
Versus
Tmt.Pappathi (deceased), W/o.Ganapathiya Pillai, 69 Market Street, T.R.Pattinam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. relevant market value was determined based on urbanization. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. disputed compensation and grounds for appeal outlined. (Para 5) |
| 3. previous judgments confirm land valuation and appeal rationale. (Para 7 , 9 , 10) |
J U D G M E N T
Heard.
2.This appeal has been filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 , challenging the award dated 31.10.2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Puducherry at Karaikal in L.A.O.P. No. 56 of 2001. The appellants before this court are Union of India and the Deputy Collector (Revenue)-cum-Land Acquisition Officer, Karaikal.
3.The acquisition in question pertains to land measuring 00.02.47 Are in T.S. No. F/2/17/4D/5, situated at Karaikal, which was acquired for the purpose of establishing the II Market and Sandhai at Karaikal. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 24.06.1998, and the Land Acquisition Officer originally fixed compensation at Rs. 60,000/- per Are, based on the guideline value.
4.The claimant, dissatisfied with the quantum, sought reference under Section 18 of the Act. Upon reference, on a comprehensive appraisal, the reference Court noted that, although classi
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
