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

2025 Supreme(Bom) 675

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
M.S. SONAK, JITENDRA SHANTILAL JAIN
Sojar Alias Rukminbai W/O Hari Mule – Appellant
Versus
Krishnath Alis Krishna S/O Gopal Tate – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

(M. S. Sonak, J.)

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. Rule. The rule is made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

3. The Petitioner seeks the following substantive reliefs by instituting this Petition.

“(A.) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling the impugned Order dt. 21/12/2023 passed by Respondent No. 4 i.e. Competent Authority, Land Acquisition Authority cum Deputy Collector No. 11, Solapur in Land Acquisition Case No. 11/Kavi/RR/1281/2023.

(B.) This Hon’ble Court be please to issue writ of mandamus or writ in nature of mandamus or issue any appropriate writ or order directing Respondent No.4 to refer the dispute together with the amount determined by the competent authority to the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction of District Solapur i.e. District Court, Solapur”

4. Mr Rajepandhare, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that under the scheme of the National Highways Act, 1956 (the NH Act), the competent authority has no right or jurisdiction as to the apportionment of

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