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

1979 Supreme(Guj) 4

A.M.AHMADI
RABARI MAHADEV AMRA – Appellant
Versus
PRANT OFFICER,radhanpur – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: J.U.MEHTA, KUSUM M.SHAH, S.K.GHADIA

A. M. AHMADI, J.

( 1 ) ). A poor ignorant agriculturist who received the amount of compensation fixed under the award of 28th March 1968 is sought to be denied due compensation in respect of his land acquired by the State Government on the hypertechnical ground that the protest under the second proviso to sec. 31 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter referred to as (the Act) was not made in writing before he accepted the said amount. Sec. 31 (1) provides that on making an award under sec. 11 the Collector shall tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award and shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or more of the contingencies mentioned in the next sub-section. Sub-sec. (2) next provides that if the persons interested do not consent to receive the amount of compensation awarded to them or if there be no person competent to alienate the land or if there be any dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or as to the apportionment of it the Collector shall deposit the amount of the compensation in the court to which a reference under sec. 18 would be submitted; provided that any person









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