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

1998 Supreme(SC) 964

A.S.ANAND, B.N.KIRPAL, V.N.KHARE
T. N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


( 1 ) WE have heard Dr Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the state of Arunachal Pradesh, Mr Salve, learned amicus curiae, the learned additional Solicitor General on behalf of the Union of India as well as Dr dhavan and Mr Sanghi, learned Senior Counsel.

( 2 ) ALTHOUGH we find force in the submission of the learned amicus curiae that clause (c) of para 7 of the order dated 15-1-1998 is quite explicit, but after hearing the apprehension expressed by Dr Singhvi, we consider it appropriate to clarify that clause (c) of para 7 of the order dated 15-1-1998 shall not be construed as any restraint on the State Government to dispose of the timber belonging to/vesting in it which is lying on the floor of the forest or in the depots.

( 3 ) WITH the aforesaid clarification, 1a No. 299 is disposed of.

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