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

2004 Supreme(All) 227

R.S.TRIPATHI, MARKANDEY KATJU
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Kamal Mustafa Khan – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Appellants : P. K. Bisaria, S.C.

JUDGMENT

M. Katju and R. S. Tripathi, JJ.—This appeal has been filed after a delay of 385 days against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Bulandshahr dated 27.10.1995 in Land Acquisition Reference No. 266 of 1992.

2. It has been stated in para 3 of the affidavit in support of the delay condonation application that certified copy of the judgment and decree dated 27.10.1995 was applied on 19.1.1996, and thereafter opinion from the D.G.C. (Civil) was sought vide letter dated 19.1.1996 (vide Annexure-1 to the affidavit).

3. Opinion of the D.G.C. (Civil), Bulandshahr was received on 14.2.1996. After receipt of the opinion of the D.G.C. (Civil) the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bulandshahr wrote a letter on 14.2.1996 to the Executive Engineer Temporary

Division, P.W.D. Department, Bulandshahr to file an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 27.10.1995 (vide Annexure-2 to the affidavit).

4. It is alleged in para 6 of the affidavit in support of the delay condonation application that on 23.2.1996 the Executive Engineer Construction Division II, P.W.D. Bulandshahr wrote a letter to the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Bulandshahr to file an appeal (vide Ann





















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