Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

Land Acquisition Compensation Methodology Revisited by Supreme Court: Deductions for Development Charges Clarified

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has revisited the methodology for determining compensation for acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court clarified the approach to calculating deductions for development charges and highlighted the importance of uniform valuation. The judgment, rendered by a bench comprising of [Insert Names of Judges], aims to ensure fair and just compensation for landowners affected by acquisition.

"Uniform valuation based on the Central Land Use Certificate (CLU) certificate and the developed nature of the land is essential for equitable compensation determination."

The subject of the case revolved around the determination of compensation for land covered by Section 4(1) Notification issued under the Land Acquisition Act. The appellants contested the compensation awarded by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, emphasizing the potential of the acquired land due to its proximity to industrial complexes and highways.

The Court, in its ruling, observed, "Proper deduction for development charges is pivotal for accurate valuation of the acquired land." It highlighted the significance of utilizing sale exemplars that closely mirror the size, location, and neighborhood of the acquired land. The judgment emphasized the need to calculate incremental value while factoring in the appropriate deduction for development charges.

One of the key takeaways from the ruling was the Court's rejection of the belting system in favor of a uniform valuation approach. The Court stated, "Uniform valuation, based on the Central Land Use Certificate (CLU) certificate and the developed nature of the land, is essential for equitable compensation determination."

The Supreme Court, while allowing the appeals in part, determined the market value for the acquired lands at Rs. 1,49,14,975 per acre. The ruling underscored the importance of clear and reasoned deduction percentages for development charges. The Court also directed all concerned authorities to strictly adhere to the principles laid down in the judgment, ensuring fair compensation for landowners within the specified timeframe.

Date of Decision: 23 August 2023

BESCO LIMITED vs STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS   

Similar News