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

2017 Supreme(MP) 870

HEMANT GUPTA, VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
State of M. P. – Appellant
Versus
Rajubai – Respondent


Advocates:
Sanjay Dwivedi for appellants; Sudhir Rawat for respondents.

JUDGMENT

1. The above mentioned writ appeals are identical in nature as common question of law and facts are involved therein, thus they are disposed of by a common order. But the facility of reference, the facts are taken from Writ Appeal 558 of 2017.

2. The challenge in the present appeal is an order passed by the Learned Single Bench on 29.7.2006, whereby the writ petition was allowed and the proceedings of taking paper possession was quashed. Resultantly, in view of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 ( for short “the Repeal Act”), the proceedings for declaring the urban land as surplus came to be abated.

3. The brief facts out of which the present appeal arises is that one Ramkishan was owner of the land measuring 16.179 Hectares bearing Survay No. 12 village Lalpur, Tahsil and District Ujjain. The said land was leased to the present writ petitioners in the year 1981. The mutation of which was sanctioned by the Additional Tahsildar, Ujjain on 29th October, 1987.

4. Ramkishan, the original owner submitted return under section 6 of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short “the Act”) on 23rd May, 1977. Thereafter, proceedings were taken under 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