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

2002 Supreme(Guj) 82

B.C.PATEL, SHARAD D.DAVE
MOHANLAL NANABHAI CHOKSY – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: PRASHANT DESAI, R.C.KODEKAR, R.S.SANJANWALA

B. C. PATEL, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioners, by this petition, have challenged the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the `acquisition Act) [annexure-H and Annexure-J dated 09/02/1990 and 11/02/1991 respectively] and have prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus or appropriate writ directing the respondents not to acquire the lands of the petitioners. The petitioners have also prayed that the action of acquisition is bad in the eye of law and Surat Municipal Corporation [hereinafter referred to as the `corporation] has no authority or jurisdiction under law to acquire the lands for any such public purpose [establishment of vegetable market] and the authority under the provisions contained in the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the `produce Act) is the only competent authority to establish market.

( 2 ) THE petitioners are the owners of the lands bearing Survey Nos. 1587 to 1596, 1597-A-Part, 1599 to 1601 of Ward No. 4 of Taluka Choryasi of Surat city. It is the case of the petitioners that the property is fully constructed and occupied by tenants. The petitioners have contended








































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