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

1989 Supreme(Ker) 57

SREEDHARAN
NANAPPAN KONTHI – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent


Judgment :-

1. Petitioners challenge the proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for acquisition of properties mentioned in Ext. P1 notification for expansion of Travancore Electro Chemicals Industries Limited, Chingavanam. The attack is on two counts. First one is that declaration issued u/s. 6 of the Act was after the expiry of one year from the date of publication of Ext. PI notification u/s. 4 (1) of the Act, and hence it is invalid. The second ground is that the acquisition for expansion of the existing unit of a company is bit by S.44B of the Act and hence liable to be quashed. I shall proceed to deal with these contentions in detail.

2. Ext. P1 notification u/s. 4 (1) of the Act was issued in the Gazette dated 17-2-1987. It was published in Deepika daily on 17-2-1987 and in Malayala Manorama daily on 21-2-1987. S.6 declaration was issued on 7-3-1988. Second proviso to S.6(1) of the Act states that no notification u/s. 6 shall be made after the expiry of one year from the date of publication of notification u/s. 4(1) of the Act. Therefore, it is argued that declaration u/s. 6 of the Act should have been published on or

















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