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

1983 Supreme(Del) 318

PRAKASH NARAIN, B.N.KIRPAL
MUNNI LAL – Appellant
Versus
LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR DELHI – Respondent


B. N. KIRPAL

( 1 ) THE challenge in these connected writ petitions is to the validity of acquisition proceedings which have been initiated by the issuance of Notifications under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 5th and 25th November, 1980.

( 2 ) THE main arguments have been addressed in Civil Writ Petition No. 426 of 1981. with regard to the validity of Notification under Section 4 of the Act and, therefore, it is necessary to advert to the facts in this case in some detail. The facts of the other cases are similar to Civil Writ Petition No. 426 of 1981. except the date of the Notification and the villages in respect of which the said notification under section 4 has been issued.

( 3 ) THE undisputed facts are that the land of the petitioner Munni Lal is situate in village Satbari. There is in existence a Master Plan of Delhi which came in to effect on 1st September, 1962 under the provisions of the Delhi Development Act. The said Master Plan covers the whole of the Union Territory of Delhi and indicates the land use therein. According to the Master Plan, village Satbari is shown in the agricultural green belt an,d is outside the urbanizable limits. The land therein can be u



















































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