https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286917 A respondent's cross-objection seeking enhancement of compensation survives dismissal of the main appeals and must be decided independently on its own merits under Order 41 Rule 22(4) CPC. The court must separately examine whether the evidence supports enhancement by reference to the statutory parameters governing market value under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A summary rejection without discussion or reasons is not legally sustainable. The cross-objection was therefore required to be heard afresh on merits, and the matter was remanded to the High Court for that purpose. en-us Tue, 16 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Mar 2020 10:00:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286917 A respondent's cross-objection seeking enhancement of compensation survives dismissal of the main appeals and must be decided independently on its own merits under Order 41 Rule 22(4) CPC. The court must separately examine whether the evidence supports enhancement by reference to the statutory parameters governing market value under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A summary rejection without discussion or reasons is not legally sustainable. The cross-objection was therefore required to be heard afresh on merits, and the matter was remanded to the High Court for that purpose. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 16 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=286917