<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2005 (8) TMI 679 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175344</link>
    <description>Comparable sale deeds are the primary evidence for fixing market value in land-acquisition compensation when they are genuine, proximate and relate to similar land in the vicinity; valuation should not rest mainly on oral testimony or prior awards, and any departure from the acquiring authority&#039;s valuation requires cogent reasons and consideration of relevant statutory factors. The text also notes that even where valuation reasoning is legally flawed, superior courts may still decline interference in discretionary jurisdiction where the stake is small and further litigation would be disproportionate, so equitable considerations can outweigh the error.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2015 21:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=405626" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 679 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175344</link>
      <description>Comparable sale deeds are the primary evidence for fixing market value in land-acquisition compensation when they are genuine, proximate and relate to similar land in the vicinity; valuation should not rest mainly on oral testimony or prior awards, and any departure from the acquiring authority&#039;s valuation requires cogent reasons and consideration of relevant statutory factors. The text also notes that even where valuation reasoning is legally flawed, superior courts may still decline interference in discretionary jurisdiction where the stake is small and further litigation would be disproportionate, so equitable considerations can outweigh the error.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175344</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>