Delhi Court August 1994 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Phira Ram and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1994
Reported in: 55(1994)DLT498; 1994(30)DRJ712
Devinder Gupta, J.(1) This judgment is meant to dispose of 22 appeals arising out of various awards made by the reference courts determining the amount of compensation payable for acquisition of the claimants' lands situated in village Gharoli, which were acquired for public purpose, namely, 'Dairy Colony in Shahdara' by virtue of notification dated 19th August, 1976 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1897 (hereinafter referred to (is the Ait.)(2) 881 bigha 6 bids was of land was notified turn being acquired for the a fore mentioned public purpose at the behest of Delhi Municipal Corporation. Actual acquisition took place with respect of 873 bigha 9 bids was only for which Collector, Land Acquisition (ME), Delhi on 31.1.1979 made his award No.740/78-79. The Collector considered Rs.1,550.00 per bigha to be the fair and reasonable market value of the acquired land. finding compensation award to be inadequate, claimants sought references for determination of amount of com...
Shreeyut Shri Gopal Bansal Vs. Thapar Builders (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1994
Reported in: 1994IIIAD(Delhi)1434; 55(1994)DLT591; (1994)108PLR76
R.C. Lahoti, J.(1) The defendant .is a builder. On 21.2.1988, the defendant entered into an agreement to sell a flat having an area of 88.7 sft bearingNos. 9 and 10 on the first floor of a multi-storeyed commercial complex known as THAPAR CHAMBERS-111, at 2, Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, New Delhi. The consideration was fixed at Rs. 9,45,443.49. The sale consideration has been paid to the defendant. The defendant delivered possession of the flat to the plaintiff but it was found that the plinth area was only 519.61 sft instead of 888.7 sft as wasagreed. Adding at the rate of 20% the total area would come to 623.53 sft. In view of the shortage of the area, the plaintiff served a notice and then filed the present suit seeking specific performance of the agreement to sell to the extent to which the area has fallen short.(2) It appears that though the suit was contested initially but 'during the course of hearing the scope of controversy narrowed down. On 9.5.89, the Court appointed architect to...
ishwar Dass Sath Vs. Union of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1994
Reported in: 55(1994)DLT624; (1994)108PLR69
Devinder Gupta, J.(1) This is an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the Award dated7.3.1969 passed by Shri G.R. Luthra, Additional District Judge, Delhi in Land Acquisition Case No. 317/67 determining the amount of compensation.(2) The appellant's property comprised in land measuring 583.32 square yards,on C.T. Road, Subzi Mandi, Delhi was acquired for public purpose on the basis ofa notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 14.3.1957. The Collector, Land Acquisition, determined the amount of compensation on the basis of capitalisation of income and an overall award of Rs. 49,000.00 was made. Feeling dissatisfied, a reference was sought. Through the impugned award the reference Court held that the net rental value of the property had rightly been found by the Collector to be atRs. 2,448.47 p.a. Instead of 20 years purchase on the capitalised value as was taken by the Collector, the reference Court calculated th...
Sardar Singh Vs. Additional District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-01-1994
Reported in: 55(1994)DLT615; 1995(32)DRJ211; 1995RLR16
Devinder Gupta, J.(1) In both these writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India same and similar prayer is made on similar facts. Direction is sought for quashing the order dated 1.7.1991 by which the application for grant of permission to sell the land was ordered to be returned to the Sub Registrar which, according to the petitioners, tent amounts to refusal to register the deeds of sale and further direction sought is that the sale deeds executed by respondent No. 4 in favor of petitioner be directed to be accepted for registration and to register the same in accordance with law without insisting Upon the production of No Objection Certificate. (2) It is alleged that 1/2 share in land measuring Rectangle No. 95. Killa No. 11/1(2-16). 11/2 (0-3). 12(4-16). 13 (4-16) 14 (4-16). 18/2(2-0). 18/3 (0- 8) and Rectangle No. 126. Killa No. 23/2 (4- 13). and Rectangle No. 131. Killa Nos. 3/1(3-11). 4(4-16). 7(4-16).. 8(4-16). 13/1(0-13) and 13/2(4-13) situated in villa...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›