BHAGABATI PRASAD BANERJEE
Sumer Mal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
(2). Petitioner was desirous of raising construction on the plot and for that matter he applied to the Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur (referred to hereinafter as `the U.I.T.) for seeking permission. The U.I.T. felt that division of plot in between petitioner and Shri Gopal Mal is a sub-division and, therefore, sub-division charges and penalty was imposed on the petitioner. The same was deposited by petitioner. After the aforesaid deposit the matter was processed for granting permission for raising construction and the permission was granted to the petitioner vide Annex.2. This permission was granted subject to certain conditions. The construction started on 11.2.1994.
(3). Petitioner clams that he h
6. Daryao and others vs. State of U.P. and others (AIR 1961 SC 1457)
7. G.K. Dudani and others vs. S.D. Sharma and others (AIR 1986 SC 1455)
1. Morgan Stanley Mutual Fund vs. Kartick Das ((1994) 4 S.C.C. 225)
5. G.S. Lamba & ors. vs. Union of India & ors. ((1985) 2 S.C.C. 604)
9. Uda Ram vs. Central State Farm and others (AIR 1998 Raj. 186)
10. Jagan Singh vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Rajasthan & Anr
14. Mangi Lal vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and others (1991 (2) R.L.R. 466)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.