Indore Development Authority vs Tarak Singh & Ors. Etc.Etc on 2 May, 1995
This has also been explained by their Lordships of Hon. Supreme Court in Indore Development Authority (supra) in para 8.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.20 seconds)C.G. Ghanshamdas & Ors vs Collector Of Madras on 12 September, 1986
"Having considered the respective contentions, we are of the view that the Full Bench of the High Court of M. P. has laid down the law correctly. Section 3(d) of the Central Act defines the 'Court' to mean a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction. Section 19 of the Central Act gives right to the claimant or the owner of the land for seeking reference. The Collector is enjoined to make a reference for the determination of the objection raised by the claimant regarding either the measurement of the land or the amount of compensation. Thereafter, the Collector is obligated to make the statement to the Court in the manner prescribed Under Section 19. On receipt thereof, Under Section 20, the Court is to cause a notice served as mentioned therein. Under Section 22, the Court conducts the proceedings as a civil Court. Sub-section (2) of Section 2 of the Civil Procedure Code defines the decree and Section 2(14) of the Act defines 'order'. Their Lordship also referred the earlier decision of Hon. Supreme Court in Ghanshamdas (supra).
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Seth Gowardhandas S/O Seth ... on 17 October, 1992
Section 51 and Section 8 of the Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act as adopted by the State of M. P. with amendment in its application to the State of M. P. is pari materia. A similar question also came up before the Full Bench of this Court in the case of State of M. P. v. Seth Gowardhandas, 1993 MPLJ 536 = AIR 1993 MP 70 and it was held :
1