<?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>1990 (9) TMI 362 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293729</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the revised compensation for land acquisition, awarding Rs. 15 per square yard for the first belt and a flat rate of Rs. 25,000 per acre for the remaining area, with solatium at 15% and interest at 6% per annum. The court dismissed the petitioners&#039; appeal for enhanced compensation, emphasizing the importance of paying the court fee upfront and not delaying payment. The court clarified that the petitioners could not invoke Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act as they had already sought a reference under Section 18. The petition was ultimately dismissed, with a suggestion for the government to consider ex-gratia payment to the petitioners.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2021 10:19:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637580" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (9) TMI 362 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293729</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the revised compensation for land acquisition, awarding Rs. 15 per square yard for the first belt and a flat rate of Rs. 25,000 per acre for the remaining area, with solatium at 15% and interest at 6% per annum. The court dismissed the petitioners&#039; appeal for enhanced compensation, emphasizing the importance of paying the court fee upfront and not delaying payment. The court clarified that the petitioners could not invoke Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act as they had already sought a reference under Section 18. The petition was ultimately dismissed, with a suggestion for the government to consider ex-gratia payment to the petitioners.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293729</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>