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

1987 Supreme(All) 84

K. J. SHETTY, B. N. SAPRU, A. N. VERMA
STATE – Appellant
Versus
RADHA RAMAN AGARWAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.N.AGARWAL, V.D.Singh

K. J. SHETTY, CJ.

( 1 ) IN view of the importance of the question raised in the Writ Petition, the matter has been placed before us for decision.

( 2 ) THE question relates to the scope and ambit of Cl. (b) of S. 2 (q), Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (Act 33 of 1976) (shortly called the Act ).

( 3 ) THE matter arises in this way : respondent 1, Radha Raman Agarwal is the owner of the four plots of land measuring 1420, 125, 300, and 100 sq. metres respectively. In all it measures 1945 sq. metres. The plots are located in Bareilly city which is a category C of the urban agglomeration in Schedule I of the Act. The maximum ceiling prescribed for such cities is 1500 sq. metres. The competent authority initiated proceedings under the Act for determining the excess land held by respondent 1. By order dated April 30, 1977 it was held that an extent of 445 sq. metres is surplus which respondent 1 is not entitled to hold. Respondent 1 preferred an appeal to the District Judge, Lucknow who allowed the appeal and held that no part of the land held by respondent 1 is in surplus. He has observed that under the Building Regulations or Direction 20-C, 1176 sq. metres of the land in
























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