Back
(SUPREME COURT)
B.P. Singh and Arun Kumar, JJ.
Bijay Kumar Saraogi v. State of Jharkhand
Civil Appeal No. 848 of 1999; Decided on 26.4.2005.
flfoy izfdz;k lafgrk] 1908 && /kkjk 152 && ds v/khu mica/k && fu.kZ; esa xf.kr laca/kh Hkwyksa dh xyfr;k¡ ‘kq) djus ds fy, vkJ; fy;k tk ldrk gS && lkjHkwr vuqrks"k tks fMdzh ds v/khu iznku ugha fd;k x;k gS mldk nkok djus ds fy, vkJ; ugha fy;k tk ldrk gSA
Singh, J. -- We have heard counsel for the parties.
The facts not in dispute are that lands belonging-to the appellant were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Collector made his award against which the appellant preferred a reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and the same was pending when the Land Acquisition Amendment Bill was introduced in the Parliament on 30th April, 1982 and the Amendment Act came into force from 24th September, 1984. In between these two dates Reference Court made its award the appellant received the amount awarded to him and did not prefer a further appeal there from.
In the year 1995 the appellant filed an application under section 152 CPC before the Special Sub-Judge, Ranchi claiming that he was entitled to the benefit conferred by section 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended by the Amendment Act. The learned Sub-Jude held that the said application was not maintainable and the said finding has been affirmed by the High Court.
We find no reason to interfere with the order of the High Court because a mere perusal of section 152 makes it clear that section 152 CPC can be invoked for the limited purpose of correcting clerical errors or arithmetical mistakes in the judgment. The section cannot be invoked for claiming a substantive relief which was not granted under the decree, or as a pretext to get the order which has attained finality reviewed. If any authority is required for this proposition, one may refer to the decision of this Court in State of Punjab v. Darshan Singh [2004(1) SCC 328].
The appeal, therefore, lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.
No costs.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
