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

1989 Supreme(AP) 81

S.S.M.QUADRI
E. Ramasubbareddy – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


S. S. M. QUADRI, J.

( 1 ) THE land of the petitioner was acquired for Srisailam Project. Notification under S. 4 (1) and declaration under S. 6 of the Land Acquisition Act were published on February 20, 1981. The award was passed on 15-9-1986. It is stated that cheques were issued to the petitioner for the amount of compensation. The petitioner presented the cheques in his bank. According to the petitioner, the cheques ought to have been en-cashed on or before 24th September, 1984 as the period of two years prescribed under S. 11-A of the Act would expire by that date. As the cheques were not cashed before that date, the petitioner submits there is no award in the eye of law and all the proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act will be deemed to have lapsed by virtue of S. 11-A of the Act. The petitioner, therefore, prays that a writ of mandamus may be issued directing the respondents 1 and 2 to issue a fresh notification under S. 4 (l) of the Land Acquisition Act.

( 2 ) THE respondents filed common counter affidavit. It is stated that the cheques were issued on 7-9-1986. It is further stated that under S. 11-A of the Act the award has to be passed within two years of the declarati





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