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

1981 Supreme(P&H) 47

P.C.JAIN, J.M.TANDON, S.S.SANDHAWALIA
Indo Swiss Time Limited, Dundahera – Appellant
Versus
Umrao – Respondent


Judgment

S.S.SANDHAWALIA, J.

1. Whether a company for whose benefit land is acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 can be impleaded as a party in the Court of the District Judge in a reference preferred under Section 18 of the Act aforesaid is the meaningful issue which has necessitated this reference to the Full Bench.

2. Undoubtedly there was a sharp divergence of judicial opinion on the aforesaid issue. However, it appears in me that a recent judgment of their Lordships in Himalaya Tiles and Marble (P.) Ltd. V/s. Francis Victor Coutinha, AIR. 1980 SC 1118, to which a detailed reference follows hereinafter has now, cut the Gordian knot cleanly in favour of the petitioner-company.

3. For an issue so pristinely legal, the particular facts would ultimately pale into insignificance. However, it is apt to briefly outline the matrix thereof which has given rise to these twelve revision petitions now before us. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the issue being identical, this judgment would govern all of them.

4. The State of Haryana initiated the acquisition proceedings under Ss.4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act) for t








































































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