Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

STATE OF PUNJAB versus PRITAM SINGH ETC. ETC.

Decided
30 August 1995
Judges listed
K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Dismissed

Citations

Official
[1995] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 195 · 1995 INSC 520
Not shown
2 other citation strings that other judgments attach to this one, on evidence too thin or too divided to publish.

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

Having seen the details of the facts and circumstances in these appeals we do not think that there is any substance for interference.

p. 196, margin A

A notification under s.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published acquiring 25 aGres and odd for public purpose, namely, for establishment of grain market. The Land Acquisition Collector in his award dated February 18, 1972 awarded compensation at varying rates between Rs. 40,000 to Rs. 10,000 per acre. On reference, the Additional District Judge, in his award and decree dated May 3, 1976, enhanced compensation varying between Rs. 90.000 and Rs. 30,000 per acre. On appeal, the High Court awarded on flat rate of Rs. 70,220 per acre. Being dissatisfied with it, these appeals have been filed.

p. 196, margin A

We have seen the judgment of the High Court. Practically, for large extent of land enhancement made by the Additional District Judge was reduced from Rs. 90,000, Rs. 85,000, Rs. 80,000 and Rs. 75,000 per acre to Rs. 70,220 per acre. The only question is of the lands for which Rs. 65,000 and Rs. 35,000 were awarded, which were enhanced to Rs. 70,220. As to the first part namely, compensation of Rs. 65,000 per acre which was enhanced to Rs. 70,000, there is not much of difference. Though we find there is substantial difference for the second category, there is no material on record showing detail of lands covered by this part of the order. So, it. is difficult for this Court to decide whether interference with this part of the order of the High Court is called for.

p. 196, margin C

Under these circumstances, the appeals are dismissed but without costs. T.N.A. Appeals dismissed.

p. 196, margin E