INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus TARAK SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus TARAK SINGH AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

The appellant, though not the claimant, is seeking to avoid the higher compensation awarded by the Reference Court in its appeal, and thus must pay ad valorem court fee under Section 8 of the M.P. Court Fees Act, 1870 on the value of the compensation being challenged. Article 11 of Schedule II does not apply.

Parties
Appellant: Indore Development Authority; Respondents: Tarak Singh and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 May 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Disposing Appeal From High Court Order
Outcome
Appeals disposed of
Legal Topics
Memorandum of Appeal, Ad Valorem Court Fee, Reference Court, Land Acquisition Compensation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Indore Development Authority

Appellant

Tarak Singh and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Disposing Appeal From High Court Order

  1. 1 Whether appellant-authority is required to pay ad valorem court fee on memorandum of appeal against order granting enhanced compensation under Land Acquisition Act, 1894
  2. 2 Applicability of Section 8 of Madhya Pradesh Court Fees Act, 1870 to such appeals

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant, though not the claimant, is seeking to avoid the higher compensation awarded by the Reference Court in its appeal, and thus must pay ad valorem court fee under Section 8 of the M.P. Court Fees Act, 1870 on the value of the compensation being challenged. Article 11 of Schedule II does not apply.

Court Disposition

Appeals disposed of

Orders

  • Appellants are required to pay ad valorem court fee.
  • Two months' time granted to pay deficit court fee.