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

1996 Supreme(SC) 330

K.RAMASWAMY, G.B.PATTANAIK
Gurbachan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


ORDER

This writ petition is filed against the order passed by this Court under Article 136 allowing the appeal and setting aside the order of the High Court and the arbitrator awarding enhanced solatium and interest under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by amendment Act 68 of 1984 in respect of lands acquired under Requisition and Acquisition of the Immovable Property Act, 1952. A three-Judge Bench of this Court had held that the Amendment Act 68 of 1984 or the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has no application to the award passed under Section 8 of the Requisition and Acquisition of the Immovable Property Act. Consequently, the direction and order for the payment of interest and solatium was held to be without jurisdiction and, therefore, it would be nullity. The question then is : whether writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution would lie ?

2. Dealing with the same question of Abdul Rehman Antulay v. Union of India & Ors. etc.1, this Court had observed thus :

"In my view, the writ petition challenging the validity of the order and judgment passed by this Court as nullity or otherwise incorrect cannot be entertained. I wish to make it clear that the dismissal of t









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