Back
B. VEERAPPA, K. S. HEMALEKHA
R. Surendra Babu – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Ministry of Defence – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Veerappa, J.
Though the present Cross Objection along with Writ Appeal are posted for final hearing, Sri M.B.Nargund, Learned Additional Solicitor General of India along with Sri Jayakara Shetty, Learned Counsel for respondent No.1/Union of India raised preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of cross objection in the writ appeal filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961.
I. BRIEF FACTS OFTHE CASE:
2. The State Government issued preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, dated 09.06.2005 proposing to acquire various extents of lands situated at Benniganahalli, K.R.Puram, Bengaluru, for the benefit of Defence Research and Development Organization (DRDO). On 22.08.2008, one of the land owner viz., Smt.Krishnamma filed W.P.No.21948/2005, which came to be allowed in part, quashing the invocation of urgency clause and directed the Land Acquisition Officer to give an opportunity of hearing under Section 5(A) of the Land Acquisition Act. Considering the objections filed by the cross- objector, the Land Acquisition Officer by the Order dated 19.01.2010 opined that the land in question is not required for the purpose
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961, High Court of Karnataka Rules, 1959, and Writ Proceedin....
A cross objection has its own independent existence under the Code of Civil Procedure but the same can not be construed to apply to a proceeding under writ jurisdiction or an appeal arising therefrom
Important points:Neither Order XLI nor Order XLIA applies to proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in view of the Explanation to Section 141 of the C.P.C. Secondly, Rule 159 of t....
Cross-objections are maintainable in appeals to the High Court from Tribunals despite lack of specific statutory provision.
The court affirmed that the Appellate Court has broad discretion to condone delays in filing cross-objections, especially when justified by unique circumstances such as prolonged stays and the death ....
The court affirmed that procedural non-compliance in appeals does not invalidate proceedings unless substantial prejudice is shown, emphasizing the importance of assessors' written opinions under the....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
