Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Tuesday, 11 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2018-01-19 remanded

State of Punjab and Ors vs Thuru Ram

Bench: 2 — Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

In Brief

The State of Punjab challenged a High Court judgment that awarded Rs. 5,77,377/- for standing fruit trees on acquired land. The respondent claimed 250–396 fruit trees on 7 kanals 2 marlas (under one acre), but expert evidence showed only 90 trees could be planted per killa (one acre). The land lacked perennial water, relying instead on bucket watering. The Supreme Court found the High Court overlooked these material contradictions—particularly the physical impossibility of planting claimed numbers—and remitted the matter for fresh hearing to properly evaluate all evidence.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Land Acquisition Compensation Fruit Trees Expert Evidence Valuation

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login