G. P. MATHUR, S. B. SINHA, V. N. KHARE
State Of Maharashtra – Appellant
Versus
B. E. Billimoria – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Majority Opinion
G.P. Mathur, J. (On behalf of himself and V.N. Khare, CJI)-The State of Maharashtra has preferred this appeal by special leave against the judgment and order dated 31.1.1983 of High Court of Bombay by which the writ petition filed by respondents No. 1 and 2 was allowed and the orders passed by the Competent Authority and the Appellate Authority under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulations) Act, 1976 (for short the Act ) were set aside and it was declared that the respondents do not hold any land in excess of the ceiling limit of Pune Agglomeration. The notification issued under Section 10(3) of the Act was also set aside.
2. B.E. Billimoria (respondent No. 1) and Laxmidas Kalyanji Kapadia (respondent No.2) together owned a plot bearing CTS No.82, Koregaon Park, Pune having an area of 5428.09 sq. meters. In the statement filed under Section 6 of the Act respondent No.1 disclosed that besides above he owned a flat having an area of 297.28 sq. meter in a building owned by a co-operative housing society in Bombay. Respondent no.2 disclosed that besides CTS No.82, Koregaon Park, Pune he owned a residential
M/s. D.L.F. Qutab Enclave Complex Educational Charitable Trust v. State of Haryana and Ors.
Kunj Behari Lal v. District Judge, Gorakhpur and Others
Angoori Devi (Smt.) v. State of U.P. and Others
Angoori Devi (Smt.) v. State of U.P. and Others
Bhavnagar University v. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd. and Others
Meera Gupta (Smt.) v. State of West Bengal and Others
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.
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.