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

2001 Supreme(Mad) 250

K.SAMPATH
V. SREEKANTAN – Appellant
Versus
REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appearing Parties:K. Srikumaran Nayar, M. Dhandapani, Advocates.

Judgment :

K. SAMPATH, J.

( 1 ) THE civil revision petition has been filed against the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kuzhithuri, dismissing the application in I. A. No. 381 of 1997 in l. A. O. P. No. 9 of 1997 on his file. The application itself was for the appointment of an advocate Commissioner under Order 26, Rule 9 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil procedure for the purpose of ascertaining the following facts: (1) Prepare a plan of the acquired land separately showing the areas acquired from the shares of first claimant and the second claimant with reference to the sketch filed by the claimants in Court and as per the marks made on the requisition body; (2) Estimate the value of the building bearing door No. 9/35-A and the trees standing on the acquired land from the share of the first claimant; (3) Estimate the value of the land, building bearing door No 9/35, the compound wall and other structures falling within the acquired land from the share of the second claimant; (4) Estimate the value of land at kuzhithurai in the open market; (5) Note whether the acquired land is situated very close to the kuzhithurai Junction, Devikumari women's College, Training sch













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