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

1992 Supreme(All) 603

M. K. MUKHERJEE, SUDHIR NARAIN
Vishnu Pratap Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate appeared:
Tej Pal

JUDGMENT

Sudhir Narain, J.

1. The present wrist petition has been filed for issue of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no. 3 to make a reference to the District Judge, under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. The facts in brief are that plot no. 631, area 4 bigha 18 biswansi, situate in village Tappa Khurd, Tehsil ;and district Firozabad, was acquired by the State Government under the provisions of the Act, for the purpose of Navin Mandi Samiti and the State Government had taken possession of the land under section 17 of the Act. Har Prasad, respondent no. 4, was tenure holder of this plot and an award was made by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, respondent no. 2, in his favour.

The petitioner claims that he entered into an agreement with Har Prasad on 19th August 1988 to purchase the right to realise the amount given in the award for a consideration of Rs. 6,66,400-. In the agreement it was mentioned that the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs. 3,000/- as advance towards the sals consideration. On 4th October 1988 the petitioner moved an application before the Special Land Acquisition Officer that the tenure-holder may be pa














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