SARAL SRIVASTAVA
Bhartiya Rashtriya Rajmarg Pradhikaran – Appellant
Versus
Manju Dixit – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the appellant.
2. The appellant, Bhartiya Rashtriya Rajmarg Pradhikaran has preferred the present appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1996') praying for setting aside the order dated 06.08.2020 passed by the District Judge, Shahjahanpur in Arbitration Case No.16 of 2016 under Section 34 of the 'Act, 1996'.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant in the exercise of power under Section 3-A (1) of the National Highway Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as) issued notification dated 16.11.2009 with respect to the lands situated in the number of villages for the widening of NH-24 to four-lanes. By the said notification, Gata No.193 area 0.1260 hectare (hereinafter referred to as 'land in question') situated in village Maujampur, Tehsil Sadar, district Shahjahanpur owned by respondent no.1 was also acquired.
4. The declaration under Section 3-D of the 'Act, 1956' in respect of the land in question was issued on 08.10.2010. The competent authority while disposing of the objection of respondent held that since land in question is recorded as agricultur
Atma Singh Vs. State of Haryana
Attar Singh and Another Vs. Union of India and Another
Digamber and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra and Others
Dyna Technologies Private Limited Vs. Crompton Greaves Limited
M/s Navodaya Mass Entertainment Limited Vs. M/s. J.M. Combines
MMTC Limited Vs. Vedanta Limited
Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Vs. Saw Pipes Ltd.
Sabhia Mohammed Yusuf Abdul Hamid Mulla v. Land Acquisition Officer
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.