REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

UNION OF INDIA Appellant

V/S

RAJIV GUPTA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

BUTA SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. V. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED 8. (1985) 3 SCC 737. (RELIED) [PARA 29] 9. (1991)1 SCC 174. (RELIED) [PARA 29] 10. (1994) 4 S]
IN HASTTMDI WALIMCHAND (DEAD) BY LRS. V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [RELIED (1998) SLT 227=1 (1998) CLT 58 (SC)= 45. AIR 1926 BOM 420. [PARA 111]]
LONDON AND NORTH EASTERN RAILWAY COMPANY V. B.A. COLLIERIES LIMITED [REFERRED . 38. AIR 1997 SC 2669. (RELIED) [PARA 100]]
MUJAFFER ALI KHAN V. SECY. OF STATE [REFERRED ; 33. AIR 1921 MAD 324. (REFERRED) [PARA 84]]
RAGHUNATH ROW V. SECY. OF STATE [REFERRED ; 34. AIR 1972 MYSORE 313. (REFERRED [PARA 84]]
SUNDER V. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED =IV (2001) CLT 18 (SC)=CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6271 /98 21. AIR 1973 ORISSA 173. (RELIED) [PARA 55]]
STATE OF KERALA V. MALAYALAM PLANTATION LTD. [REFERRED 37. AIR 1945 APPEAL CASES 143. (REFERRED) [PARA 84]]
COLLECTOR V. HABIBULLAH DIN AND OTHERS [RELIED 15. JT 1990 (4) SC 771. (RELIED) [PARA 43}]
WAMAN SHRINIWAS KINI VS. RATILAL BHAGWANDAS AND CO [RELIED 18. AIR 1975 SC 2065. (RELIED) [PARA 48]]
SHEODAN SINGH VS. DARYAO KUNWAR [RELIED 2. AIR 1993 SC 1202. (RELIED) [PARA 22]]
SUPDT OF TAXES DHUBRI SUPDT OF TAXES DHUBRI SUPDT OF TAXES DHUBRI SUPDT OF TAXES TINSUKIA VS. ONKARM NATHMAL TRUST:ASSAM JUTE SUPPLY CO LTD:LAKSHMICHAND INDRA CHAND:THANAI TEA ESTATE [RELIED 19. (1999) 2 SCC 89. (RELIED) [PARA 50]]
NARAYANA PRABHU VENKATESWARA PRABHU VS. NARAYANA PRABHU KRISHNA PRABHU [RELIED 6. (1999) 5 SCC 590. (RELIED) [PARA 27]]
HARCHARAN VS. STATE OF HARYANA [RELIED ;]
KAUSALYA DEVI BOGRA SYED YUSLJFUDDIN SYED ZIAUDDIN VS. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AURANGABAD:STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [RELIED 44. (1998) 2 SCC 388. (RELIED) [PARA 107]]
BHAG SINGH VS. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH [RELIED 29. JT 1989 (2) SC 427. (RELIED) [PARA 63]]
BHAG SINGH VS. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH [RELIED]
CHIMANLAL HARGOVINDDAS VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER POONA [RELIED 28. AIR 1985 SC 1576. (RELIED) [PARA 62]]
UNION OF INDIA PRITHIPAL SINGH RAM MEHAR RAJ KUMAR DELHI CATTLE BREEDING FARMS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. RAGHUBIR SINGH :UNION OF INDIA [RELIED 30. J.T. 1993(1) SC 448. (RELIED) [PARA 72]]
SCHEDULED CASTE CO OPERATIVE LAND OWNING SOCIETY LIMITED BHATINDA VS. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED]
VIJAY COTTON AND OIL MILLS LIMITED VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [RELIED 16. AIR 1997 SC 1779. (RELIED) [PARA 44]]
PREMIER TYRES LIMITED VS. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION [RELIED 3.II (1999) SLT 217=11 (1999) CLT 46 (SC)=1999 (2) SUPREME 104. (RELIED) [PARA 24]]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. VISHKARMA AND CO [RELIED 31. AIR 1914 BOM 284. (REFERRED) [PARA 84]]
CHAND KAUR VS. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED]
P RAM REDDY VS. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER HYDERABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HYDERABAD [RELIED 40. (1995) 4 SCC 231. (RELIED) [PARA 103]]
CALCUTTA METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. DOMINION LAND AND INDUSTRIES LTD [RELIED 41. (1997) 6 SCC 54. (RELIED) [PARA 104]]
MANIPUR TEA CO PVT LIMITED VS. COLLECTOR OF HAILAKANDI [RELIED 17. AIR 1959 SC 689. (RELIED) [PARA 47]]
UNION OF INDIA VS. A AJIT SINGH S O S CHET SINGH R O NO 19 FAIZ BAZAR DARYAGANJ DELHI 6 [RELIED .HI (1997) CLT 29 (SC)= 39. (1995) 2 SCC 305. (RELIED) [PARA 101]]
MEHARBAN VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [RELIED 42. (1998) 2 SCC 385. (RELIED) [PARA 105]]
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER CHITTOR VS. L KAMALAMMA DEAD [RELIED II (1998) SLT 482=1 (1998) CLT 130 (SC)= 43. AIR 1984 SC 892. (RELIED) [PARA 106]]
KAPUR CHAND JAIN DEAD VS. STATE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [RELIED 20. VI (2001) SLT 641=IV (2001) CLT 18 (SC). (RELIED) [PARA 51]]
HOPE PLANTATIONS VS. LTD [RELIED 7. AIR 1983 SC 43.(RELIED) [PARA 29]]
BADNI VS. SIRI CHAND [RELIED U (1999) SLT 217=11 (1999) CLT 46 4. AIR 1995 ALLAHABAD 2. (RELIED) [PARA 25]]
UNION OF INDIA VS. KISHAN CHAND [RELIED ;]
CHANDAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED 48. 86 (2000) DLT 825 (DB). (RELIED) [PARA 117]]
RAMESHWAR SOLANKI VS. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED]
NET RAM VS. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED ; 13.59 (1995) DLT 569. (RELIED) [PARA 41] 14. AIR 1967 J AND K 44. (RELIED) [PARA42]]
ANIL KUMAR SHARMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [RELIED 49.57 (1995) DLT 410. (RELIED) [PARA 118]]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. BABU RAM [RELIED 5. AIR 1977 SC 1268. (RELIED) [PARA 26]]
STATE VS. BADRI NATH KAPOOR [REFERRED 26. AIR 1994 KARNATAKA 112. (RELIED) [PARA 60]]
SPECIAL TAHSILDAR LAND ACQUISITION YERRAGUNTLA VS. K REDDY [REFERRED 36. AIR 1981 NOC (KERALA) 163. (REFERRED) [PARA 84]]
ADDITIONAL SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER PORTS MANGALORE VS. P ANANTHA BHAT [REFERRED 35. AIR 1990 A.P. 124. (REFERRED) [PARA 84]]
COLLECTOR OF CUTTACK VS. MAYADHAR SAHU [REFERRED 22. AIR 1981 M.P. 263. (REFERRED) [PARA 56]]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. NAGAR PALIKA MANDSAUR [REFERRED 23. AIR 1981 PAT. 81. (REFERRED) [PARA 56]]
STATE VS. NURJAHAN SAKIL [REFERRED 25. AIR 1987H.P. 86. (REFERRED) - [PARA 56]]
SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER NHW DHARWAD VS. KALLANGOUDA FB [RELIED 27. AIR 1988 SC 1652. (RELIED) [PARA 60]]
STATE OF BIHAR VS. S K THACKER [REFERRED 24. AIR 1985 CALCUTTA 39. (REFERRED) [PARA 56]]
BOMBAY IMPROVEMENT TRUST VS. MERVANJI MANEKJI MISTRY [REFERRED 46. AIR 1988 SC 1652. [PARA 112]]
DAYA KHUSHAL VS. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR [REFERRED 32. AIR 1918 CAL 341. (REFERRED) [PARA 84]]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Four appeals have been preferred under Section 54 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by Union of India seeking reduction in the amount of compensation as awarded by the impugned award passed on 28.7.1986 by the Additional District Judge, Delhi by which the said Reference Court answered the reference of the claimant-respondents under Section 18 of the Act and determined the amount of compensation payable to them. Claimants/respondents in the cross-objections are seeking further enhancement in the amount of compensation.

(2.) . Considerable land situate in village Masoodpur was notified under Section 4 of the Act on 24.10.1961 for being acquired at public expense for public purpose, namely. Planned Development of Delhi. Before declaration under Section 6 of the Act could be issued additional land situate within the same revenue estate was notified under Section 4 of the Act on 23.1.1965 for being acquired for the same public purpose. On 5.5.1966 declaration under Section 6 was made with respect to a portion of land which was notified on 24.10.1961, for being acquired for which the Collector, Land Acquisition on 25.2.1967, after completing necessary formalities, made his Award No. 1944 classifying the land in three blocks A, B & C and offering compensation @ Rs. 1,200.00, Rs. 900.00 and Rs. 750.00 per bigha for categories A, B and C. On 6.8.1966 another declaration was made under Section 6 of the Act for the remaining land which was notified on 24.10.1961. For this portion of land on 2.12.1967 the Collector, Land Acquisition made his Award No. 2040 and offered amount of compensation to the claimants @ Rs. 1,000.00-, and Rs. 800.00 respectively to categories B and C lands. On 6.9.1966 another declaration under Section 6 was made with respect to part of the land which had been notified on 23.1.1965 for being acquired. The Collector on 26.3.1969 made his award No. 2225 for the said land offering compensation to the claimants @ Rs. 1/580.00, Rs. 1,175.00 and Rs. 600.00 respectively for categories A, B & C lands and lastly on 26.12.1968 declaration under Section 6 was issued for the remaining land for which on 22.12.1980 Award No. 90/ 80-81 was made offering compensation @ Rs. 1,200.00, Rs. 900.00 and Rs. 700.00 respectively for categories A, B & C lands.

(3.) . It is not in dispute that the specific purpose under the general purpose of Planned Development of Delhi to acquire the land being establishment of Jawaharlal Nehru University and it is also admitted that Jawaharlal Nehru University was set up on the acquired land.

Click here to view full judgment.

UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAJIV GUPTA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address