Appeal dismissed against an award increasing compensation for land acquisition of superstructure. Court held marginal increase after 30 years warranted no interference.
Appeal dismissed; award of Rs 56,110/- stands affirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
RFA No. 291 of 1988 (O&M)
Union of India and others ... Appellants vs Parkash Chand ..... Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Mohit Garg, Advocate, for the appellants.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The appellants are in appeal appeal before this Court against the award dated 1.6.1987, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur for reduction in the amount of compensation awarded to the respondent on account of acquisition of super structure.
Briefly, the facts are that super structure in question situated in the revenue estate of Village Athotarwan, Tehsil Pathankot, District Gurdaspur was acquired vide notification dated 2.12.1977 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act'). The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, the Collector') gave award of 37,580/- pertaining to super structure on 20.6.1983. The respondent filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below for consideration, who keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, awarded compensation of 56,110/-.
The respondent in the present case claimed a sum of 62,715/- on account of acquisition of super structure and shifting charges. However, only a sum of 37,580/- was granted by the Collector. Keeping in view that the increase made by the learned Court below in the amount of compensation payable on account of acquisition of super structure was quite marginal and the acquisition having taken place around 30 years back, I do not find any reason to interfere at this stage.
Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed.
23.7.2010 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Appellate Court should interfere with the award increasing compensation for super structure acquired 30 years ago due to a marginal increase.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Union of India and others
Parkash Chand
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
