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

1996 Supreme(SC) 1439

A. M. AHMADI, N. P. SINGH, SUJATA V. MANOHAR
Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Manilal Gordhandas – Respondent


JUDGMENT

N.P. Singh, J.-Leave granted.

2. These appeals have been filed on behalf of the Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority for setting aside the order passed by the High Court of Gujarat dismissing the Letters Patent Appeals filed on behalf of the appellants, against the judgment of the Single Judge of the said High Court in different writ petitions. The writ petitions had been allowed saying that the sanction accorded by the Notification dated 12.8.1983, by the State of Gujarat in exercise of powers conferred on it by clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 had lapsed after the expiry of period of 10 years and because of service of notice by the concerned land owners in accordance with sub-section (2) of Section 20 of the said Act, as during this period neither the lands in question were acquired by agreement nor proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were commenced.

3. The Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 regulated the town planning activity within the area falling within the jurisdiction of the local authorities in the State of Gujarat including the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to


































































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