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

2015 Supreme(SC) 447

H. L. DATTU, A. K. SIKRI, ARUN MISHRA
Ashok Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


Judgment

1. Delay, in filing the application(s) for substitution, if any, is condoned. Application(s) for substitution, if any, is/are allowed.

2. Delay, if any, in filing the special leave petitions is condoned.

3. Leave granted.

4. These appeals are directed against the judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in a batch of Regular First Appeals, whereby and whereunder, the High Court had disposed of all the matters in light of its judgment and order in R.F.A. No. 2695 of 2002 and connected matters dated 05.11.2012.

5. The lis in this batch pertains to acquisition of various lands situated principally in villages Fatehpur, Maheshpur, Kundli and Railley by the Respondent-State under three different Notifications issued Under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (for short, "the Act") in 29.01.1990, 21.12.1994 and 26.04.1995. Since the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) in all the matters have either followed or relied upon the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court in R.F.A. No. 2695 of 2002 (S.L.P. (C) Nos. 26432-26443 of 2013 bef






























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