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

2001 Supreme(Del) 418

MUKUL MUDGAL, DEVENDER GUPTA
OM PARKASH – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
GITA LUTHRA, OM PRAKASH AGRAWAL

( 1 ) THIS is an application seeking amendment to the memorandum of appeal to claim higher amount of compensation on the ground that while filing appeal, due to paucity of funds, the appellants could not claim proper amount of compensation had been claimed.

( 2 ) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances of the case, the principle that a claimant must be paid fair amount of compensation in case his property is acquired for public purpose by the State and relying upon the ratio of the decisions of the supreme Court in Harcharan v. State of Haryana, AIR 1983 SC 43; Bhag Singh and others v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, (1985) 3 SCC 737; Scheduled Caste Cooperative land Owning Society Ltd. , Bhatinda v. Union of India and Others, (1991) 1 SCC 174; Chand Kaur and Others v. Union of India, (1994) 4 SCC 663; Gokal v. State of Haryana, AIR 1992 SC 150; and Buta Singh (Dead) by LRs. v. Union of India, (1995) 5 SCC 284, the prayer made in the application is allowed subject to the condition of the appellant making good the deficiency in amount of Court-fee within a period of four weeks. Application stands disposed of. Application allowed.

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