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

1994 Supreme(Bom) 576

A.C.AGARWAL, K.K.BAAM
Mallu Tatya Suryavanshi – Appellant
Versus
Shripati Rama Gondhali and others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - ASHOK AGARWAL, J.:---The property in dispute is an agricultural land bearing Gat Nos. 1550 and 1551, admeasuring 0.51 Ares, situate in Village Erandole, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli. Under a sale-deed dated May 12, 1980, the petitioner has purchased the same from respondent No. 2. The said land is a fragment within the definition of the term "Fragment" under sub-section (4) of section 2 of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as "the Act"). The petitioner not being an owner of a contiguous survey number, the validity of the transaction under section 7(1) of the Act falls for our consideration in the present writ petition.

2. A further question that has fallen for our consideration in the present writ petition is in respect of the vires of section 7 of the Act. The question has been raised by the earlier Division Bench, which seized of the matter (Coram : A.M. Bhattacharjee, C.J. V.P. Tipnis, J.), who by order passed on June 28, 1994 raised the following issue and issued notice to the learned Advocate-General to answer the question of the vires and validity of section 7(1) of t



































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