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

2006 Supreme(Gau) 697

B.SUDERSHAN REDDY, BROJENDRA PRASAD KATAKEY
Sarungbam Joykumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Manipur – Respondent


JUDGMENT

B. Sudershan Reddy, C.J.

1. In this writ appeal, the judgment and order dated 4.1.2006 passed in WP(C) No. 1141/2005 by a learned Single Judge of this court, is under challenge. The writ petitioners are the appellants herein.

Background Facts:

2. The writ petitioners are the true and absolute owners of the lands and the buildings constructed thereon situated inside the palace compound at Imphal. Each one of them had purchased years ago small extent of lands from late Maharaja for a valid consideration and thereafter constructed their respective houses and living therein. The said properties are sought to be acquired compulsorily vide Notification dated 11.4.2005 for a public purpose, namely, Protection of Historical Monuments of Maharaja and Rajdarbar of New Palace. Being aggrieved by the notification issued under Section 4(1)of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") the appellants herein challenged the same in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which ultimately came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No. 67/2005. This Court took the view that the challenge to the impugned notification is a premature o



























































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