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

2000 Supreme(SC) 1898

DORAISWAMY RAJU, J.JAGANNADHA RAO
Ajjam Linganna – Appellant
Versus
Land Acquisition Officer Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad – Respondent


M.JAGANNADHA RAO, J.

(1) SPECIAL leave granted.

(2) THESE are the appeals by the appellants questioning the judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated 10-3-99 in CRP No. 2279, 2280, 2282 of 1995 and CRP No. 4022 of 1996. In these appeals there are 11 appellants in civil appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 15481/99, one appellant in the appeal arising out of SLP(C) No. 15483/99 and three appellants in civil appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 15484/ 99, seven appellants in the appeal arising out of SLP(C) No. 15485/99. All these appellants contended that the judgment of the High Court not allowing them to have a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, is liable to be set aside.

(3) THE High Court came to the conclusion inter alia that the reference Court is not entitled to amend a reference under Sections 30 and 31 into a reference also under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The High Court had given other findings against the appellants but it is not necessary for the purpose of these appeals to refer to them. Suffice it to say that after the award was passed on 16-1-76 the first appellant Ajjam Linganna in SLP No. 15481






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