SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 3

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
Cantonment Board – Appellant
Versus
Mohanlal – Respondent


ORDER

This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc. Petition No. 2090/75 passed on November 5, 1979, filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution. The admitted facts are that the appellant had issued a notice on March 27, 1993 under Section 85 of the Cantonment Act, 1924 (for short, the Act ) to the respondent for demolition of the construction made in the property now in controversy. The 1st respondent had received the notice on May 2, 1973, but he carried out further construction. However, notice under Section 256 was issued on January 3, 1974 and second notice ultimately was issued for demolition on September 13, 1974 under Section 185. The 1st respondent had submitted his reply on October 30, 1974. The area committee on December 7, 1974, passed resolution after considering the representation made by the 1st respondent to give 15 days time for compliance of the notice dated March 27, 1973 and September 13, 1974 and in case he does not comply with the same it further resolved to have the structure demolished through the agency of the Board. Calling this action in question the respondent had filed the above writ peti







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top