SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER versus MAHARANI BISWAL
Sections 23, 18, 4 and 54 Determination of Compensation The Appeal filed by Respondents under the Hon'ble Order of the Land Acquisition Officer (Appellant) increased the compensation for respondents by Rs. 10,000 per acre (e.g. According to the reference (court) the Land Acquisition Officer's dispute of Rs 75,000 per acre was that the High Court did not appreciate the evidence on record and the sale of small pieces of land sold in the area was done on its own. Based on the search, which did not accurately reflect it. Under section 4 of the Act, the Market Value Validity Notification was issued on 18 2 1987, and for that reason, the market share of the said date was to be determined and the High Court failed to identify it. How the results of the reference court were declared invalid. And without reference to the compensation and the increase in compensation, the reference court should state the reasons for this without considering the outcome of the High Court. The reference court agrees with the conclusions that, in the present case, was not made and instead came to a sudden decision to raise the compensation to Rs 75,000 per acre, the fact that the intervention by the reference court interfered. Can't be The High Court had dealt with the misconception of the agreements and speculations that the sale of small pieces of land could be a decisive factor in the compensation because it stated that the sale work was of land that received a tenth of the land acquired. Is not equal to And the Supreme Court dismisses the High Court's objection to misrepresenting evidence on record and misinterpretation of legal proposals.
