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

1993 Supreme(Guj) 284

R.A.MEHTA
ANILKUMAR RAVISHANKER TRIVEDI – Appellant
Versus
COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: M.S.SHAH, P.S.CHAMPANERI, SURESH M.SHAH

R. A. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned orders at annexure-A dated September 8 1982 passed by the Competent Authority and annexure-C dated December 19 1985 passed by the appellate authority under the Urban- Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 Against the order dated September 8 1982 an appeal was preferred on November 22 1984 The appeal was obviously and hopelessly time barred and therefore application for condonation of delay was filed and the only explanation that was given was that the appellant had not been given the information of the order dated September 8 1982 and that he came to know about that order only after two years on September 10 1984 and he had obtained certified copy immediately and thereafter the appeal was filed on November 22 1984

( 2 ) THE appellate authority had examined the case papers and it had found that the draft statement issued under section 8 (3) of the Act was sent to the appellant (petitioner Anilkumar ) and was received on his behalf on July 31 1982 Then the final statement was issued to the appellant on September 25 1982 In para 5 it is observed that the final statement was received by the appellant on 25th September 19














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