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

1999 Supreme(Del) 146

C.M.NAYAR
PURAN SINGH – Appellant
Versus
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DELHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Javed Ahmed, MANISH GOYAL, Ravinder Sethi, SUNIL KULKARNI, Surat Singh

C. M. Nayar

( 1 ) THE present petition is directed against the respondents for issuance of a writ of mandamus for commanding the respondents to do their public duty of not disturbing the peaceful possession of the land of the petitioners except according to due process of law and after giving a notice of reasonable time and for further relief that the respondents be directed to pay an exemplary amount of compensation for harassing the petitioners by sending officers etc. to dispossess them. The Notifications which are the subject matter of the present petition were upheld by a Full Bench of this Court reported as Roshanara Begum v. Union of India, 1996 I Apex Decision (Delhi) 6=61 (1996) DLT 206 (FB) which was subsequently upheld by the Supreme Court of India vide its Judgement reported as Murari and Others v. Union of India and Others, (1997) I Supreme Court Cases 15=65 (1997) DLT 1001 (SC ). The present petition, in view of the settled law is, therefore, misconceived and cannot be entertained as the petitioners had earlier impugned the Notifications which were upheld by the Apex Court.

( 2 ) THE learned Counsel for petitioners, however, contends that the petitioners have not been







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