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

1969 Supreme(Del) 165

V.S.DESHPANDE
LABH SINGH ATMA SINGH – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


V. S. DESHPANDE

( 1 ) THE petitioner and respondent No. 4 are occupants of acquired evacuee property being House No. 324/20, Suman Bazar, Bhogal, New Delhi. The petitioner is a non-claimant, while respondent No. 4 was a claimant. The petitioner s application for the division of the property was rejected by Shri K. K. Mittal, Managing Officer, who ordered in June, 1959, as per annexure b to the writ petition, that the Assistant Settlement Commissioner be asked to adjust the amount out of the claim of respondent No. 4 (by transferring fhe property to him ). The appeal of the petitioner against the order of Shri K. K. Mittal was accepted by Shri I. D. Chaudhry, Assistant Settlement Commissioner, on 11-1-1960, as per annexure c whereby the order of Shri Mittal was set aside and the case was remanded for the determination of the eligibility of the property for division by the Settlement Commissioner under- the then existing Rule 30 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955. The petitioner contends that his original application for the division of the property was revived, but the petitioner did not make any fresh application for fhe partition. The Regiona



























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