AWARD No. 8 of 1996 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
The evidence adduced by the parties clinchingly establish that the lands covered by Ex.A.1 were notified 8 years 7 months prior to the issuance of the present notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. It is well settled that awarding escalation at the rate of 10% for every subsequent year after the base year is neither excessive nor unreasonable in view of the rising prices as held by the Supreme Court (see Special Land Acquisition Officer, BTDA, Bagalkot v. Mohd. Hanif Sahib Bawa Sahib (2002) 3 SCC 688). The lower Court, after taking into consideration the settled legal position in Ranjit Singh v. Union Terriotory of Chandigarh[1], Valluri Veerabhadra Rao v. Land Acquisition Officer[2] a n d Lila Ghosh (dead) through LR Tapas Chandra Roy v. State of West Bangal[3], and after giving escalation @ 10% for each succeeding year, rightly fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.33,300/- per acre (Rs.18,000/- + Rs.15,300/- towards escalation). In view of the same, we do not see any illegality in the impugned order warranting interference of this Court. The appeals fail and the same are accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. A. GOPAL REDDY, J ________________________ ________________________ B.CHANDRA KUMAR, J Date: 25.08.2009 [1] AIR 1993 SC 227 [2] 1998(3) ALD 129 (D.B) [3] 2004(1) ALD 58 (SC)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.