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

2007 Supreme(Ori) 325

A.K.PARICHHA
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR – Appellant
Versus
SITA DEI – Respondent


( 1 ) THIS is a petition by the claimant-respondent No. 1 seeking direction of this Court to the appellant to deposit the entire awarded amount and to allow him (R-1) to withdraw 50% of such deposited amount without furnishing any guarantee or security and the balance 50% by furnishing bank guarantee or property security. According to the claimant-respondent, her lands were acquired in the year 1983 for bidanasi Triangular Development Project, but till date she has not received the compensation for the lands as the matter is still pending for determination of the fair market price, as a result, she is undergoing undue hardship and irreparable injury. Counter affidavit has been filed by the appellant wherein it is stated that in view of order 27, Rule 8a of the CPC the State Government cannot be asked to deposit the decretal amount or furnish security contemplated under Order 41 Rule 1 (3) or Order 41, Rule 5 (5) of the CPC.

( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the claimant-respondent stated that as per the provision of order 41, Rule 1 (3) and Order 41. Rule 5 (5)of the CPC an appellant shall deposit the differential decretal amount or furnish security for such amount in order to obtain an o





















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