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

2011 Supreme(MP) 181

A.K.SHRIVASTAVA
Govind Prasad Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
R.P.Khare, Puneet Shroti

JUDGMENT


( 1. ) BY this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking for the quashment and exemption from the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (in short 'the Act of 1976').

( 2. ) THE contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that possession of the disputed land was not obtained prior to the date of repealing of the Act,. Learned Counsel has submitted that on 10-3-2000 this Act was repealed and vide Section 3 of the Repealing Act, the proceedings pending under the Act of 1976 shall stand abated.

Learned Counsel submits that till the cut off date is 22-3-1999 the possession of the land was not obtained from petitioner although on paper it has been shown that the possession has been obtained and w.e.f. 22-3-1999 the Repeal Act came into force.

( 3. ) LEARNED Counsel has invited my attention to the notice of Tehsildar Nazul, Jabalpur in Case No. 57/B 121/1988-1989, dated Nil and has submitted that a notice for taking possession on 29-7-1988 was given and as per the report of process server the service of notice was made by affixture on the same date 29-7-1988. LEARNED Counsel submits that prior to 29-7-1988, a ficti





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