Promotees Allowed to Challenge Provisional Seniority List in Dispute Between Direct Recruitment and Promotion: Kerala High Court Frivolous Defenses Cannot Justify Leave to Defend Under Order XXXVII CPC Delhi High Court Candidates Merely Enrolled in Final Year B.V.Sc. Program Ineligible for Veterinary Officer Recruitment: Rajasthan High Court Manufacturing or Sale of Garments Does Not Attract Copyright Protection; Procedural Violations Under Trade Marks Act Renders Prosecution Unsustainable: P&H High Court Ownership Alone Is Not Sufficient to Maintain Eviction Suit; Plaintiff Must Qualify as a Lessor Under Lease Agreement: Calcutta High Court Findings Based on Evidence Cannot Be Interfered With in a Second Appeal Without Substantial Question of Law: AP High Court Chain of Circumstances Broken: Inferences Cannot Replace Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Kerala High Court Bail | Prolonged Incarceration Without Trial Violates Article 21 of the Constitution: Bombay High Court Encroachment on a Common Lane Gives Rise to Recurring Cause of Action: Madras High Court Holds Limitation Act Inapplicable to Pathway Disputes Reproductive Autonomy Includes the Right to Abort Without Spousal Consent: P&H High Court Access to Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 is Not an Absolute Bar Against MSEFC Awards: Supreme Court Refers Key Questions on Writ Jurisdiction to Larger Bench Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Ousted for Title and Mortgage Disputes Under SARFAESI Act: Supreme Court Principle of Bail is the Rule, Jail is the Exception: Supreme Court Panchayat Law | Mandatory Compliance With Section 34 And Rule 3 Is Non-Negotiable In Resignation Cases: Bombay High Court Quashes Resignation Of Upa-Sarpanch Recovery of Bullet Fired from Accused’s Weapon Crucial: PH High Court Reaffirms Conviction in Murder Case Injured Witness Evidence Carries Built-in Reliability Unless Contradicted Significantly: Kerala High Court Partly Allows Appeal in Murder Case Civil Dispute with Criminal Elements Cannot Be Quashed Under Section 482 Cr.P.C.: Karnataka High Court Issuance of Summons Under Section 91 CrPC During Preliminary Verification is Without Jurisdiction: High Court of J&K and Ladakh Article 21 Prevails Over NDPS Act’s Section 37 Restrictions in Cases of Prolonged Incarceration: Delhi High Court Once a Property is Waqf, It Remains Waqf Perpetually: Calcutta High Court Affirms No Secular Ownership Can Derive from Waqf Properties Surveillance Without Opportunity to Object Violates Articles 14, 19, and 21: Allahabad High Court Quashes Class-B History Sheets Mandatory Provisions of Order XXI CPC Were Violated, Rendering the Auction Sale Illegal: Punjab and Haryana High Court

“Issue of Limitation Raised Was Not Only Not Tenable but Highly Unreasonable and Improper": Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court's Order in Land Acquisition Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


New Delhi, August 22, 2023 – In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has set aside the judgments and orders passed by the High Court in First Appeal Nos. 1447 of 2006 and 1490 of 2006 related to land acquisition proceedings.

The bench comprising J. BELA M. TRIVEDI and J. DIPANKAR DATTA observed that the "issue of limitation raised by respondent- Committee before the Reference Court and before the High Court was not only not tenable but was highly unreasonable and improper." [Para 6]

The case revolved around the lands belonging to the appellant-trust that were sought to be acquired by the respondent for Agricultural Produce Market Committee. The parties had arrived at consent terms to determine the market value of the lands, and the High Court had disposed of the Writ Petition accordingly. However, the respondent-Committee raised the issue of limitation before the Reference Court, taking undue advantage of ambiguity in the consent terms.

The Supreme Court applied the doctrine of harmonious construction to interpret the document as a whole and found that the High Court's interference with the well-reasoned findings of the Reference Court was erroneous. "Such a plea raised after taking over the possession of lands in question from the appellant was not only not in consonance with the tenor of the consent terms but it smacked of ulterior motive on the part of the respondent," the bench noted. [Para 11]

The apex court held that the impugned judgments and orders passed by the High Court were ex facie erroneous and set them aside, allowing both the appeals.

Date of Decision: August 22nd, 2023

SHRI NASHIK PANCHAVATI PANJARPOL TRUST & ORS.  vs THE CHAIRMAN & ANR.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/22-Aug-2023_NASHIK_PANCHAVATI_PANJARPOL_Vs_Chairman.pdf"]

Similar News