Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH AT ITANAGAR BENCH
ROBIN PHUKAN
Union of India, Rep. by the Defence Secretary, New Delhi – Appellant
Versus
T. Migo Basa S/o Late Tomi Basar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. classifications of legal representatives in appeals (Para 1) |
| 2. overview of land acquisition awards and appeals (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. grounds for appeal and objections regarding compensation (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. arguments of appellants regarding the award process (Para 5 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. key issues formulated by the court (Para 12) |
| 6. court's reasoning on power of attorney legitimacy (Para 13 , 14) |
| 7. determining fair compensation and statutory provisions (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 8. final decision and dismissal of appeals (Para 21) |
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
1. Heard Mr. S.D. Sanjay, learned Senior Counsel cum Additional Solicitor General of India, assisted by Mr. Y. Doloi, learned senior panel counsel for the Govt. of India/appellants and also heard Mr. B. Pathak, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1-103, Ms. P. Sangita, learned Government Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh, appearing for the respondent No.104 and Mr. D. Soki, learned counsel for the respondent No.105 in L.A. App. No.01/2024.
1.1 Also heard Mr. D. Soki, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. B. Pathak, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1-103 and Mr. Y. Doloi, learned senior panel counsel for the Govt. of India/res
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
