Skip to content


Sachindra Mohan Das Gupta Vs. Governor of Tripura - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCivil Appeal No. 1552 of 1970
Judge
Reported in(1982)1SCC434
AppellantSachindra Mohan Das Gupta
RespondentGovernor of Tripura
Excerpt:
- [ a.d. koshal,; r.b. mishra and; v. balakrishnan eradi, jj.] -- land acquisition — w.b. security act, 1950 (w.b. act 19 of 1950) — section 29 (3)(c) and (8) — compensation awarded at the rate of six per cent of the market value of the land which was later acquired, held, not justified — it must be awarded in this case in terms of sub-sections (3)(c) and (8) -- after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that the compensation awarded for the requisition of the land in dispute has no legal basis to justify it. learned counsel for the parties are agreed that shri s.b. laskar, retired district judge, agartala may be so appointed......regard to the criteria enunciated therein.2. we are of the opinion that in order to have the compensation determined in accordance with law and expeditiously it is necessary for this court to appoint a commissioner. learned counsel for the parties are agreed that shri s.b. laskar, retired district judge, agartala may be so appointed. we order accordingly. the parties shall appear before him on november 25, 1981 along with their respective statements of the case regarding compensation and shall submit the same to him on that date. he shall then proceed with the investigation, examine witnesses and do all other things which may be necessary and lawful for arriving at the compensation in accordance with the above criteria. he shall prepare his report expeditiously and submit it to.....
Judgment:

A.D. Koshal,; R.B. Mishra and; v. Balakrishnan Eradi, JJ.

1. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, we find that the compensation awarded for the requisition of the land in dispute has no legal basis to justify it. It was awarded at six per cent of the market value of the land which was later acquired. That is not a basis sanctioned by law. On the other hand, the compensation should have been determined in accordance with the provisions of clause (c) of sub-section (3) of Section 29 of the West Bengal Security Act, 1950 and of sub-section (8) thereof having regard to the criteria enunciated therein.

2. We are of the opinion that in order to have the compensation determined in accordance with law and expeditiously it is necessary for this Court to appoint a Commissioner. Learned Counsel for the parties are agreed that Shri S.B. Laskar, retired District Judge, Agartala may be so appointed. We order accordingly. The parties shall appear before him on November 25, 1981 along with their respective statements of the case regarding compensation and shall submit the same to him on that date. He shall then proceed with the investigation, examine witnesses and do all other things which may be necessary and lawful for arriving at the compensation in accordance with the above criteria. He shall prepare his report expeditiously and submit it to this Court by February 15, 1982 at the latest.

3. The remuneration of the Commissioner shall be Rs 5000 in addition to a sum of Rs 500 for out-of-pocket expenses by way of engaging a typist, etc., to be paid by the parties to this appeal half and half.

4. Case to be listed for hearing before this Court in the third week of February 1982 at the top of the list as part-heard.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //