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

2006 Supreme(Raj) 418

GOVIND MATHUR
GULAB NATH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.L.Tiwari

Judgment

( 1 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he entered into an agreement with the District Rural Development authority, Jodhpur in the year 1983 for drilling and installing a tube well in his field situated in village Ranod, Tehsil Bhopalgarh, District jodhpur. At the time of agreement the cost of drilling as quoted by Ground Water Department, jodhpur was of Rs. 235/- per meter. It is also averred by the petitioner that on the basis of agreement referred above and the rates quoted by the Ground Water Department loan was advanced from the Bilara Bhoomi Vikas Bank Ltd. , Bilara but the district Rural Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as drda) instead of drilling and installing tube well in the year 1984 executed drilling of the tube well in the year 1991 and, thereafter, demanded the cost of drilling and installing tube well @ Rs. 566/- per meter. Challenge is given by the petitioner to the aforesaid rates and the demand made consequent thereto.

( 2 ) IT is contended in the petition that the respondent No. 2 i. e. DRDA, Jodhpur agreed for drilling and installing tube well @ Rs. 230/- per meter, therefore, no charge could have been made subsequently in the rates of drilli


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