<?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>2010 (12) TMI 1302 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276114</link>
    <description>A beneficiary local authority liable to bear compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has a statutory right under Section 50(2) to receive notice and to appear and adduce evidence in compensation proceedings. On the inclusive meaning of &quot;local authority&quot; and &quot;person interested&quot;, the Delhi Development Authority was entitled to participate because the acquisition was undertaken at its instance and the compensation burden fell on it. As no notice or hearing was given before the Collector or Reference Court, those proceedings were vitiated, and the High Court erred in enhancing compensation without impleading and hearing the authority. The compensation award was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh determination after hearing all affected parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2023 17:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539999" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 1302 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276114</link>
      <description>A beneficiary local authority liable to bear compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has a statutory right under Section 50(2) to receive notice and to appear and adduce evidence in compensation proceedings. On the inclusive meaning of &quot;local authority&quot; and &quot;person interested&quot;, the Delhi Development Authority was entitled to participate because the acquisition was undertaken at its instance and the compensation burden fell on it. As no notice or hearing was given before the Collector or Reference Court, those proceedings were vitiated, and the High Court erred in enhancing compensation without impleading and hearing the authority. The compensation award was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh determination after hearing all affected parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276114</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>