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

1983 Supreme(Cal) 64

S.N.SANYAL, A.K.SEN
BINAPANI BASU – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
ARUN KR.ROY, MALAY BASU, P.K.DUTT, QUDRAT E KABIR

A. K. SEN, S. N. Sanyal, JJ.

( 1 ) AN application under section 16 (3) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) which had been registered as Misc. Case No. 103 of 1980 was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Howrah, by his order dated August 28, 1982. It was so dismissed not on merits but on the technical ground that such an application was not maintainable in law. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant has moved the present revisional application challenging the said order. The application is being heard on contest by the respondent the Union of India.

( 2 ) IN laying her claim for compensation under section 16 (3) of the Act, the applicant made out a case that the telegraph authorities were engaged in pulling and connecting telephone wire from a telephone post situate on the south of the dwelling house of the applicant at Andul Daspara Road to a brick built pillar set up for the said purpose at the subscriber's premises on an adjoining plot on August 26, 1977. The dais wire was being drawn and connected ?over, in, upon and across the private path/passage and over the eastern verandah? of the applicant's house. The applicant's further case was that th








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