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

1983 Supreme(SC) 403

D.A.DESAI, D.P.MADAN
State Of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
District Judge, Unnao – Respondent


Advocates:
S.A.SYED, SHOBHA DIXIT

JUDGMENT

 Special leave granted.

2. We heard Mr. Manchanda, learned counsel for the appellant and Mrs. Syed, learned counsel for the Respondents.

3. The Prescribed Authority constituted under the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act determined the compensation payable to respondents 3 to 6 for acquisition of the surplus land and trees in the amount of Rs. 90,637.20p. The State, of U. P. having been dissatisfied with this quantum of compensation assessed by the Prescribed Authority preferred an appeal in the Court of the District judge on September 19, 1972, but as the appeal was by that time barred by limitation, the appellant simultaneously filed an application under Sec. 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay In preferring the appeal. In support of the application under See. 5, affidavits of Sri Ahmad Ullah Khan, Shri Shiam Lal Shrivastava Tahsildar Hasanganj, Sri Ram Bahadur Saxena, Sadar Kanungo of the Office of the Assistant Compensation Commissioner and Sri Rajendra Singh, Assistant Rajeswa Anubhag-6, U. P. Civil Secretariat Lucknow, were filed. Respondents 3 to 6 contested the application seeking condonation of the delay. The learned District Judge held th








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