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

1988 Supreme(Guj) 37

P.R.GOKULAKRISHNAN, R.J.SHAH
Ishabhai Umarbhai – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.R.TRIVEDI, D.D.Vyas, D.G.KARIA, M.I.HAVA, R.A.MISHRA, Y.S.LAKHANI

GOKULAKRISHNAN, C. J.

( 1 ) RULE. Mr. Hawa and Mr. Karia waive service of the rule. With the consent of the parties, all these matters are taken up today.

( 2 ) IN all the above petitions, petitioners have come forward with Special Civil Applications, inter alia, praying for a direction to the competent authority to make a reference under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. In all these cases, the prayer for making references under S. 18 was rejected on the ground that the same is barred by limitation.

( 3 ) AS regards the facts in these cases are concerned, there is no dispute that the petitioners were not present at the time the award was made by the Land Acquisition Officer; that the notice under S. 12 (2) was sent without the award annexed thereto; and that the petitioners were not award of the contents of the actual award.

( 4 ) IN view of these admitted facts, we can just refer to S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act reads as follows :-"18. Reference to Court :- (1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of






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