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

1961 Supreme(SC) 148

P.B.GAJENDRAGADKAR, K.N.WANCHOO
Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh Singh – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Land Acquisition Officer – Respondent


Advocates:
A.N.GOYAL, C.B.AGARWAL, C.P.LAL, Gopi Nath Dixit, MOHAL LAL AGRAWAL

Judgment

GAJENDRAGADKAR, J. : These two appeals arise out of two writ petitions filed by the appellant Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh against the respondents the Deputy Acquisition Officer and another in the Allahabad High Court and they were based on the same facts and asked for the same relief. Both of them raise a short common question of limitation the decision of which would depend upon the determination of the scope and effect of the provision of the proviso to S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, I of 1894 (hereinafter called the Act). Since the facts in both the appeals are substantially the same we would refer to the facts in Civil Appeal No. 25 of 1958. The decision in this appeal would govern the decision of the other appeal, Civil Appeal No. 26 of 1958.

2. The appellant Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh was the proprietor of a village Beljuri in the District of Nainital. It appears that proceedings for compulsory acquisition of land including the said village for a public purpose were commenced by respondent 2, the State of Uttar Pradesh, notifications under Ss. 4 ad 6 of the Act were issued in that behalf, and the provisions of S. 17 were also made applicable. Accordingly, afte















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