https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306850 A deemed date created by legal fiction for compensation purposes under land acquisition law could not be extended to require a fresh Section 6 declaration or a fresh award under Sections 11 or 11A. The earlier judgment had upheld the acquisition and altered only the valuation date for compensation, leaving the acquisition itself intact. A challenge to treat that earlier decision as non est for alleged conflict with the statute or Article 142 was rejected, because the prior order remained binding between the parties and its limited compensation benefit could not be unsettle d. The appeals failed and the earlier valuation framework was left undisturbed. en-us Thu, 07 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Mar 2023 12:05:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306850 A deemed date created by legal fiction for compensation purposes under land acquisition law could not be extended to require a fresh Section 6 declaration or a fresh award under Sections 11 or 11A. The earlier judgment had upheld the acquisition and altered only the valuation date for compensation, leaving the acquisition itself intact. A challenge to treat that earlier decision as non est for alleged conflict with the statute or Article 142 was rejected, because the prior order remained binding between the parties and its limited compensation benefit could not be unsettle d. The appeals failed and the earlier valuation framework was left undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 07 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306850