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

2001 Supreme(Bom) 1068

R.M.LODHA, D.B.BHOSALE
Mahadeo Ramgonda Patil & others – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra & others – Respondent


JUDGMENT - D.B. BHOSALE, J.:---The petitioners seek to challenge the acquisition of their land for the purposes of resettlement of Dudhaganga Project affected persons. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing and setting side of the notice under section 4, dated 9th August, 1990 and section 6 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "Act of 1894"), as published in the newspaper on 29th November, 1990 qua their land Gat No. 1551 admeasuring 81 ares, situate at village Abdul-Late, taluka Shirol, District Kolhapur.

2. Now, before we look at the relevant provisions and consider the challenge made, it would be perhaps better just to state briefly what credentials of the petitioners are and what is the ground for this petition. The petitioners are the heirs and legal representatives of the original landlords Ramgonda Patil. According to the petitioners, their total holding is within the permissible limit and not liable to be acquired under the provisions of the Maharashtra Resettlement of Project Displaced Persons Act, 1976 (for short "Act of 1976"). Though the petitioners filed their objections under section 5-A of the Act of 1894, against the proposed acquisition







































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