Marumakkathayam Law | Partition Is An Act By Which The Nature Of The Property Is Changed, Reflecting An Alteration In Ownership: Supreme Court Motor Accident Claim | Compensation Must Aim To Restore, As Far As Possible, What Has Been Irretrievably Lost: Supreme Court Awards Rs. 1.02 Crore Personal Criticism Of Judges Or Recording Findings On Their Conduct In Judgments Must Be Avoided: Supreme Court Efficiency In Arbitral Proceedings Is Integral To Effective Dispute Resolution. Courts Must Ensure That Arbitral Processes Reach Their Logical End: Supreme Court Onus Lies On The Propounder To Remove All Suspicious Circumstances Surrounding A Will To The Satisfaction Of The Court: Calcutta High Court Deeds of Gift Not Governed by Section 22-B of Registration Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Testimony Of  Injured Witness Carries A Built-In Guarantee Of Truthfulness: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction for Attempted Murder POCSO | Conviction Cannot Be Sustained Without Conclusive Proof Of Minority - Burden Lies On The Prosecution: Telangana High Court Credible Eyewitness Account, Supported By Forensic Corroboration, Creates An Unassailable Chain Of Proof That Withstands Scrutiny: Punjab and Haryana High Court Jammu & Kashmir High Court Grants Bail to Schizophrenic Mother Accused of Murdering Infant Son IT Act | Ambiguity in statutory notices undermines the principles of natural justice: Delhi High Court Dismisses Revenue Appeals Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction Under NDPS Act: Procedural Lapses Insufficient to Overturn Case Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Accused, Points to Possible Suicide Pact in "Tragic Love Affair" Tampering With Historical Documents To Support A Caste Claim Strikes At The Root Of Public Trust And Cannot Be Tolerated: Bombay High Court Offense Impacts Society as a Whole: Madras High Court Denies Bail in Cyber Harassment Case Custody disputes must be resolved in appropriate forums, and courts cannot intervene beyond legal frameworks in the guise of habeas corpus jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Insubordination Is A Contagious Malady In Any Employment And More So In Public Service : Karnataka High Court imposes Rs. 10,000 fine on Tribunal staff for frivolous petition A Show Cause Notice Issued Without Jurisdiction Cannot Withstand Judicial Scrutiny: AP High Court Sets Aside Rs. 75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand Timely Action is Key: P&H HC Upholds Lawful Retirement at 58 for Class-III Employees Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Not Applicable to Civil Court Orders: Patna High Court Uttarakhand High Court Dissolves Marriage Citing Irretrievable Breakdown, Acknowledges Cruelty Due to Prolonged Separation Prosecution Must Prove Common Object For An Unlawful Assembly - Conviction Cannot Rest On Assumptions: Telangana High Court

Land Acquisition | Compensation Raised to Rs. 4,50,000 Per Acre for Land Acquired Under Hippargi Barrage Project - Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India, in a recent judgment, addressed appeals concerning the enhancement of compensation for land acquired under the Hippargi Barrage project. The central legal issue was the determination of the fair market value and statutory benefits owed to the appellants whose lands were acquired for the construction of canals.

The appellants, landowners of irrigated lands, were initially awarded compensation of Rs. 1,31,263 per acre by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (S.L.A.O.). Dissatisfied, they approached the Reference Court, which increased the market value to Rs. 3,00,000 per acre. Subsequent appeals and cross-objections by both parties led to a re-evaluation of the compensation amount. Notably, in a similar matter, the market value was set at Rs. 3,69,000 per acre, a decision previously confirmed by the Supreme Court.

Comparable Sales Method: The appellants sought compensation at Rs. 5,00,000 per acre, based on a High Court order for similar lands acquired during the same period under the same project. The Supreme Court noted the respondents' admission to the fairness of a market value of Rs. 3,69,000 per acre for acquisitions from 2004-2005.

Annual Escalation: Acknowledging an annual escalation rate of 5% applied from the fixed market value in 2004-2005, the court found it just to set the compensation for lands acquired in 2007 at Rs. 4,50,000 per acre, modifying an earlier High Court order.

Equitable Relief: The Court directed that the appellants be compensated at the enhanced rate with all statutory benefits, interest, and costs, though it upheld the High Court's decision to deny interest for delays in filing cross-objections.

Decision The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, granting compensation at Rs. 4,50,000 per acre. It emphasized that the decision was based on the peculiar facts of the case and should not serve as a precedent for future claims.

Date of Decision: May 07, 2024

Shripal & Anr. vs Karnataka Neravari Nigam Ltd. & Anr.

Similar News