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

1995 Supreme(SC) 589

B.L.HANSARIA, K.RAMASWAMY
Balram Chandra – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
K.J.JOHN, Pratap venugopal, SUNIL GUPTA

JUDGMENT

ORDER:—Notification under S.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act was published in the State Gazette on October 19, 1957 followed by a declaration under S.6 published on November 6, 1957. The possession was taken on December 7, 1957. The Collector made his award on September 29, 1958. The petitioner sought for reference under S.18 and the Collector referred the matter on November 8, 1986. The District Judge in his award dated December 16, 1985 declared the notification under S.4 (1) and the declaration under S.6 to be null and void. Against that, an appeal was filed before the High Court under S.54. By the judgment and order dated October 31, 1994, the Division Bench has set aside the order holding that the District Judge had no jurisdiction to declare the notification under S.4 (1) to be void. Thus, this SLP.

2. Mr.Sunil Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, in his usual vehemence, contended that the notification under S.4(1) did not contain the particulars required thereunder and the District Judge was unable to proceed with the determination of the compensation pursuant to the reference under S.18. Therefore, the District Judge was within his power to declare t





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