Judgment

GROVER, J. :- The main point involved in this appeal namely the challenge to the notifications issued under Ss. 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act have been disposed of by us in the connected civil appeal No. 34 of 1972, and the decision therein will govern the decision in this case as well. The only other contention is the one which was raised as the third argument before the High Court. According to the High Court the appellant had admittedly purchased the plot in dispute from, Ram Sarup and Madan Mohan in the year 1951 i.e. subsequent to the publication of the notification under S. 4 of the Act. He took no steps to get his name mutated. When the time came for the issue of notice under S. 9 Ram Sarup and Madan Mohan were still shown in the official papers as the tenure holders of the plot in question and the individual notice required by S. 9 (3) was therefore issued to them and not to the petitioner Bhola Shankar, the present appellant. The High Court rightly observed that for this it was the appellant who himself was to blame. Moreover, from the counter affidavit filed in the High Court it was clear that the public notice under Section 9 (1) was affixed at prominent pl