https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199435 In connected cross-appeals arising from the same award, non-substitution of a deceased respondent did not abate the government appeal in toto where the legal representatives were already on record in the companion matter, were heard on merits, and the plea of abatement was knowingly abandoned. The court also upheld the land acquisition valuation, holding that compensation must rest on reliable market evidence such as location, building potential, and the claimants' own recent purchase price, rather than on isolated small-sale instances that are not a safe basis for valuing a much larger acquired tract. The High Court's compensation rate was therefore sustained. en-us Fri, 23 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Feb 2018 16:06:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199435 In connected cross-appeals arising from the same award, non-substitution of a deceased respondent did not abate the government appeal in toto where the legal representatives were already on record in the companion matter, were heard on merits, and the plea of abatement was knowingly abandoned. The court also upheld the land acquisition valuation, holding that compensation must rest on reliable market evidence such as location, building potential, and the claimants' own recent purchase price, rather than on isolated small-sale instances that are not a safe basis for valuing a much larger acquired tract. The High Court's compensation rate was therefore sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 23 Mar 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199435