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

2018 Supreme(SC) 218

DIPAK MISRA, A. K. SIKRI, A. M. KHANWILKAR, D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, ASHOK BHUSHAN
Indore Development Authority and Etc. – Appellant
Versus
Shyam Verma – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Vikas Singh, P.S. Patwalia, Tushar Mehta, B.K. Satija, Anil Grover, Ajay Bansal, Sanjay Kapur, Ms. Megha Karnwal, Ms. Mansi Kapur, Shekar Raj Sharma, Abhinash Jain, Manu Aggarwal, Gaurav Yadav, Shivam Kumar, Sanjay Kumar Visen, Mrs. Veena Bansal, Abhinash Jain
For the Respondents: Mukul Rohatgi, Sushil Kumar Jain, C.U. Singh, Dinesh Dwivedi, Dhruv Mehta, Shyam Divan, Vikas Kumar, Rohit Chandra, Manish Yadav, Manish Paliwal, Aakash Nandolia, Abhinav Gupta, Harsh Jain, Ms. Ankita Gupta, Shailendra Sharma, Pankaj Sharma, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Sandeep Narain, Pradeep K. Dubey (For M/s S. Narain & Co.), Baldev Atreya, Deepak Goel, Anubhav Ray, Yash Raj Singh Deora, Varun Thakur, Varinder Kumar Sharma, Mayank Kshirsagar, Abhishek Bharti, Ms. Vaishnavi Subrahmanyam, Balaji Srinivasan, Ms. Srishti Govil, Ms. Pratiksha Mishra, Gopal Shankarnarayan, Sahil Mongia, Tushar Singh, Ms. Christi Jain, Ankur Mittal, Shree Pal Singh, Ms. Rachana Srivastava

ORDER :

Heard Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Vikas Singh and Mr. P.S. Patwalia, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Mr. Shyam Divan, Mr. C.U. Singh, Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain and Mr. Dinesh Dwivedi, learned senior counsel for the respondents.

2. A three-Judge Bench of this Court in Pune Municipal Corporation and another v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and others, (2014) 3 SCC 183, had delivered a judgment interpreting Sections 24(1) & (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for brevity, 'the 2013 Act').

3. In Yogesh Neema and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others, (2016) 6 SCC 387, a two-Judge Bench doubting the decision rendered in Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Assn. v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2015) 3 SCC 353, referred the matter to a larger Bench. When the matter stood thus, a two-Judge Bench vide order dated 07.12.2017 in C.A.No.20982 of 2017 @ SLP(C)No.2131 of 2016 (Indore Development Authority v. Shailendra (Dead) through Lrs. & Ors.) thought it appropriate to refer the matter to a larger Bench. The order passed in that regard reads as follows







































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