Supreme Court of India
KAPURTHALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST, PUNJAB versus LAND ACQUISITION TRIBUNAL, KAPURTHALA AND ORS. on 31 October 1995
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
A
KAPURTHALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST, PUNJAB v.
LAND ACQUISITION TRIBUNAL, KAPURTHALA AND ORS.
B
OCTOBER 31, 1995
fK. RAMASWAMY AND B.N. KIRPAL, .JJ.]
The Pu11jab Tow11 Improvement Act, 1922/Land Acquisition Act, 1892:
S.36/Ss.4, l1 a11d J/f-Tow11 Improvement Scheme-Acquisition of C land-Compe11satio11-Belting of la11d by Collector and award of compe11sa-tio11 be/twise-Tribu11a/ awardi11g compensatio11 at u11ifonn rate-Held, T1ibunal did 11ot commit any ennr of law in detennining the compensation.
Certain lands of the land-owners were acquired under the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922. The Collector classified the lands into three D belts and awarded compensation at different rates for different belts. On reference, the Tribunal awarded compensation at uniform rate of Rs. 540 per Marla. The Town Improvement Trust filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the award of compensation at uniform rate by the Tribunal; whereas the land-owners filed writ petitions claiming enhance-ment of compensation. The High Court dismissed all the writ petitions. E Aggrieved, the Trust as well as the land-owners filed the appeals by special leave.
Dismissing all the appeals, this Court
HELD : The plan indicates that the lands are situated in a developed F area bounded by roads on all the three sides. The Tribunal had not committed any error of law in determining the compensation for the acquired land. [613-E]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1986 of 1992. G
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.2.82 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in C.W. No. 5120 of 1981.
With C.A. Nos. 3055/82, 3040/84 and 10188 of 1983.
H
S.K Mehta and G.K. Bansal (NP) for the appellant for Kapurthala
612
Improvement Trust, Punjab.
Vinoo Bhagat, (NP) and Vimal Dave, for the Respondents_
A
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Notification under Section 36 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, B
1922 was published on September 14, 1975 acquiring an extent of 124 kanals 3 marlas of the land in Kapurthala Town for Kapurthala Develop--men! 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 compensa-tion @ Rs. 300, Rs 360 and Rs. 210 per maria respectively. maria respectively. On reference under Section 18, the Tribunal by its award dated April 16, 1981 awarded uniform rate of compensation at Rs. 540 per maria. When writ petitions came to be filled 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.
tion @ Rs. 300, Rs 360 and Rs. 210 per maria respectively. maria respectively. On reference C
Shri S.K. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the Kapurthala Im-provement 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 We have seen the plan which would indicate that the lands have seen the plan which would indicate that the lands the plan which would indicate that the lands 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 claimant~ for further enhancement stand <lisn1isscd. No costs.
Collector. We have seen the plan which would indicate that the lands We have seen the plan which would indicate that the lands have seen the plan which would indicate that the lands the plan which would indicate that the lands plan which would indicate that the lands are E
R.P.
Appeals dismissed.