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

2003 Supreme(Del) 301

A.K.SIKRI, B.C.PATEL
BAL RAM (SHRI) – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
GEETA MITTAL, L.B.Rai, Ravinder Sethi, SANDEEP SETHI, SANJAY PODDAR, SUMITA RAY

A. K. Sikri, J.

( 1 ) THE aforesaid writ petition was filed in the name of three petitioners, namely, S/s. Bal Ram, Dewan Singh and Gian Ram all sons of late Shri har Chand. It was filed through Smt. Sumita Rai claiming herself to be the General power of Attorney (GPA) holder and a copy of the said GPA dated 5. 2. 1990 was enclosed as annexure to the writ petition. During the pendency of this writ petition, gian Ram, one of the petitioners, filed CM 12454/2003 for dismissal of the petition, inter alia, on the ground that the land in question belonged to him as well as his two brothers and Smt. Sumita Rai was never authorised to file any such petition. Reference was made to certain proceedings pending between the parties in Suit No. 1486/89 which was filed in this Court and has since been transferred to District court. It was also stated in the application that one of the petitioners, namely, Bal ram passed away on 27. 5. 1994 and on his death alleged GPA stood revoked by operation of law.

( 2 ) WHEN this application came up for hearing on November 21,2003, Counsel for the Union of India also made a statement that possession of the land in question had already been taken on 12. 4. 2











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