Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

KAPURTHALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST, PUNJAB versus LAND ACQUISITION TRIBUNAL, KAPURTHALA & ORS

Supreme Court Cases

1995 SCC Supl. (4) 650 JT 1995 (8) 556 1995 SCALE (6)272

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


KAPURTHALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST, PUNJAB V. LAND ACQUISITION TRIBUNAL, KAPURTHALA & ORS [1995] RD-SC 599 (31 October 1995)

RAMASWAMY, K.

RAMASWAMY, K.

KIRPAL B.N. (J)

CITATION: 1995 SCC Supl. (4) 650 JT 1995 (8) 556 1995 SCALE (6)272

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

W I T H CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3055/82, 3040/84 AND 10188/OF 1983.

O R D E R Notification under Section 36 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 was published on September 14, 1975 acquiring an extent of 124 Kanals 3 marlas of the land in Kapurthala Town for Kapurthala Development Scheme No. 2.

Notification under Section 42 of the Act was published on August 6, 1976. The Collector in his award dated October 12, 1976 classified the lands into three belts `A', `B' and `C' and granted compensation @ Rs. 300/-and Rs.360/- and Rs.210 - per marla respectively. On reference under Section 18, the Tribunal by its award dated April 16, 1981 awarded uniform rate of compensation at Rs. 540/- per marla. When writ petitions came to be filed under Article 226, the Division Bench of the High Court by its common order on February 23, 1982 dismissed them. Thus these appeals by special leave.

Shri S.K. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the Kapurthala Improvement Trust, contended that having rejected all the sale transactions, the Tribunal was not justified in awarding uniform market rate since the Collector made belting and that different rates were awarded by the Collector. We have seen the plan which would indicate that the lands are situated in a triangle bounded by roads on all the three sides. The lands are situated in developed area.

In our considered opinion, the Tribunal had not committed any error of law in determining the compensation for the acquired land. Therefore, the appeals of the Improvement Trust as well as of the claimants for further enhancement stand dismissed. No costs.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.