Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.22 seconds)

Shri Popat Bahiru Govardhane vs Special Land Acquisition Officer on 25 January, 2012

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and considering order impugned passed by competent authority in rejecting the application under Section 28A of Page 2 of 8 HC-NIC Page 2 of 8 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:56:32 IST 2017 C/SCA/4523/2017 ORDER the Act and law laid down with regard to applicability of Limitation Act vis-a-vis an application preferred under Section 28A of the Act, 1894 and the powers conferred upon the authorities in almost identical circumstances in the case of Popat Bahiru Govardhane and Ors. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Anr. [(2013) 10 SCC 765], the Apex Court held as under:
Bombay High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 51 - G S Godbole - Full Document

State Of Andhra Pradesh And Anr vs Marri Venkaiah And Ors on 28 July, 2003

"14.In State of A.P. v. Marri Venkaiah, this Court reconsidered the aforesaid judgements including the judgment in Harish Chandra Raj Singh and held that the statute provides limitation of 3 months from the date of award by the court excluding the time required for obtaining the copy form the date of award. It has no relevance so far as the date of acquisition of knowledge by the applicant is concerned. In view of the express language of the statute, the question of knowledge did not arise and, therefore, the plea of the applicants that limitation of 3 months would being from the date of knowledge, was clearly unsustainable and could not be accepted. The Court also rejected the contention of the applicants that a beneficial legislation should be given a liberal interpretation observing that whosoever wants to take advantage of the beneficial legislation has to be vigilant and has to take appropriate action within the time-limit prescribed under Page 3 of 8 HC-NIC Page 3 of 8 Created On Mon Aug 14 00:56:32 IST 2017 C/SCA/4523/2017 ORDER the statute. Such an applicant must at least be vigilant in making efforts to find out whether the other landowners have filed any reference application and if so, what is the result thereof. If that is not done then the law cannot help him. The ratio of the judgement in Harish Chandra Raj Singh was held to be non-applicable in case of Section 28-A of the Act. The Court observed:
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 75 - Full Document
1   2 Next