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

1995 Supreme(SC) 1097

B.N.KIRPAL, K.RAMASWAMY
State Of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Dewan Singh – Respondent


( 1 ) - Leave granted.

( 2 ) THE notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act") was furnished on 22/01/1981. Notices were given under Section 9 of the Act. The Collector after conducting an enquiry made an award on 19/04/1984 and allegedly took possession of the land on the even date. The respondents assert that they are in possession. The respondents filed the writ petition on 13/05/1985 challenging the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act on the ground that dispensing with an enquiry under Section 5-A exercising power under Section 17 (4) of the Act was bad in law as there was no urgency and the award was, on the face of the case, valid in law. The High Court by order dated 27/05/1985 allowed the writ petition following Dharam Singh v, State of Haryana (C. W. P No. 2891 of 1984 decided on 9/11/1984 ). Thus this appeal by special leave.

( 3 ) IT is contended by the appellant that after the award has been made, the respondent received compensation and also sought reference under Section 18. The Land Acquisition Officer was competent to make the award within two years under Section 11-A of the Act after the Amendment Act 68 of 1984. The




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