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

1965 Supreme(SC) 106

R.S.BACHAWAT, J.C.SHAH, K.SUBBA RAO
G. H. Grant – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Advocates:
D.P.Singh, M.K.RAMAMURTHY, R.C.Prasad, R.K.GARG, S.C.AGRAWAL, S.R.GHOSH

Judgement

SUBBA RAO, J.: I regret my inability to agree with brother Shah, J, on one of the questions raised in the appeals, namely whether the Land Acquisition Officer can, after making the award under S. 12 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter called the Act, fixing the compensation for the land acquired and apportioning the same among the persons interested in the land, refer the question of appointment under S. 30 of the Act to the decision of the Court. Shah, J., held he could; but with great respect to him, I take a different view.

2. The facts are fully stated in the judgment of Shah, J., and they need not, therefore, by restated here.

3. The answer to the problem raised falls to be decided on a conspectus of the relevant provisions of the Act. Section 9 of the Act enjoins on the Collector to cause public notice to be given at convenient places on or near the land to be taken, stating that the Government intends to take possession of the land, and that claims to compensation for all interests in such land may be made to him: under Sub-s. (2) thereof such notice shall state the particulars of the land so needed and shall require persons interested in the land to appe




























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