Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.29 seconds)

Ramniklal N. Bhutta & Anr vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors on 19 November, 1996

14. Before adverting to the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties this court deems it appropriate to refer few decisions of the Hon‟ble Apex Court being relevant and germane hereto. It is settled law that the wherever there is conflict between the private interest and the larger public interest, the later prevails over the former. The private interest must give way to the public interest and the same should stand subordinate to public good. The Apex Court in "Ramniklal N. Bhutta and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and others" reported in AIR 1997 SC 1236at para 10 has noticed as follows:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 576 - B P Reddy - Full Document

State Of U.P. And Anr vs Johri Mal on 21 April, 2004

21. Lastly it goes without saying that the consistent view of the constitutional courts in the matters of land acquisitions has been that the viability or feasibility in the process of acquisition does not fall with the domain of courts unless it exfacie is found to be contrary to law or is tainted with palpable malafides. Reference in this regard to the judgement of the Apex court titled as "State of UP and Ors Vs. Johri Mal reported in (2004) 4 SCC 714 would be advantageous wherein following has been observed:
Supreme Court of India Cites 29 - Cited by 353 - S B Sinha - Full Document
1   2 Next