Find a Lawyer

TAJ MUHAMMAD versus XEN IRRIGATION, DARGAI

Section 18 Convention of Evidence (10 of 1984), Section 72 of the Land Assessment of Land Compensation, the prospective document was not considered or exhibited and the effect of the appellant's complaint was that after acquiring his land. And during the course of the compensation, officials did not consider the potential value of the Land Referee Judge's decision on compensation, squeezes obtained from the relevant registers, and other documents kept in the file, were taken into account. 2,190 was raised from Rs 27 to Rs 4000 per marl while the judge took up the matter while raising the compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Consider the only transaction that took place over a period of five years before the issuance of the notice under Cushion 4, in which 10 acres of land was sold at a cost of Rs 40,000, on land sold for post office. Was relied upon. The appellant and the judge kept the matter on which it was relied upon and it was found that the land was not in the vicinity of the appellant compensation land fixed by the referee judge, it was restored by the High Court. ? Appellant had failed to record the sale at the relevant time to determine the price of this country. The question was based on the appellant's land and his dependence on the appellant in two different societies (villages), but the wand was the same sketch showing the land location mentioned by the appellant and not showing it in the evidence. And neither was its manufacturer tested. Thus, the sketch had no significance in the eyes of the law; the Supreme Court refused to increase the compensation provided by the referee judge, dismissing the appeal. patent advocate from Baroute lawyer