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

1976 Supreme(Guj) 96

M.P.THAKKAR
KALIDAS MOTIRAM PATEL – Appellant
Versus
MAKIBAI RUSTOMJI VIMADALAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: BHARAT B.NAIK, P.N.DAVE

M. P. THAKKAR, J.

( 1 ) M. P. THAKKAR J. The question regarding the import and true meaning of the expression a contiguous survey number occurring in sub-sec. (1) of sec. 7 of Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Hold- ings Act 1947 (Bombay Act No. LXII of 1947) (hereafter referred to as the Act) has surfaced in this petition by an agriculturist who purchased land comprised in a survey number which was so situated that it was adjoining to his own land except and save for the fact that a narrow approach road separated the two boundaries.

( 2 ) IN village Gandevi there was an agricultural field admeasuring 12 Bighas and 4 Vasas comprised in Survey No. 259. In the year 1913 5 Bighas and 3 Vasas of survey No. 259 were placed under acquisition for a public purpose viz. Bilimora-Sara road. Some time later 13 Vasas of land were placed under acquisition for a public purpose Viz. for construc- tion of an approach road from Gandevi Kasba to Gandevi Station. The result of the latter acquisition was that the land came to be divided into two parts separated by the approach road which was constructed in pur- suance to the acquisition proceedings. The portion falling towards the






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