https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288491 In an acquisition for industrial development in favour of KIADB, an allottee lessee was not a beneficiary or person interested in the compensation proceedings because the land had been acquired for KIADB, not for the company, and the lease placed the burden of enhanced acquisition cost on the lessee. The company therefore had no right to notice, hearing or locus to challenge the award, and the High Court's remand to reopen the reference for its benefit was without legal basis and liable to be set aside. The landowners were entitled to enhanced compensation on the land's market value and industrial potential, subject to proper deductions, with statutory benefits. en-us Thu, 30 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Jun 2020 20:05:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288491 In an acquisition for industrial development in favour of KIADB, an allottee lessee was not a beneficiary or person interested in the compensation proceedings because the land had been acquired for KIADB, not for the company, and the lease placed the burden of enhanced acquisition cost on the lessee. The company therefore had no right to notice, hearing or locus to challenge the award, and the High Court's remand to reopen the reference for its benefit was without legal basis and liable to be set aside. The landowners were entitled to enhanced compensation on the land's market value and industrial potential, subject to proper deductions, with statutory benefits. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 30 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288491