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

1995 Supreme(SC) 1056

B.N.KIRPAL, K.RAMASWAMY
Kashi Ram Namdeo Zambro – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


Advocates:
D.M.Nargolkar, G.B.SETHI, S.M.JADHAV

ORDER

1. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) was published in the State Gazette on 16-1-1975, acquiring certain extent of land part of which land belonged to the appellant for construction of Panzar Talaw. The Collector made his award under Section 11 on 15-11-1977. Notice of award as required under Section 12 was served on the appellant on 17-11-1977. On an objection raised, the appellant made good the deficit court fee. Thereafter, the Collector made the reference to the civil court. During the reference proceedings, the counsel appearing for the State raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the reference which was upheld since requisite court fee was not paid within the limitation of six weeks from the date of the receipt of the notice of the award, as required under clause (b) of proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 18. On appeal, the High Court upheld the contention by judgment dated 27-4-1982 to 29-4-1982 and accordingly dismissed the appeal. Thus this appeal by special leave against the decree of the Bombay High Court.

2. The only question that arises for consideration is whether the claimant is required

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