Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.72 seconds)

T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union Of India & Ors on 6 July, 2011

61. The appellants have also made valiant attempts to buttress their arguments with regard to the criteria to be adopted for determination of an area to be declared as forest by relying upon the pronouncement of this Court in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad Vs. Union of India24 by its order dated 26.09.2005 whereunder the concept of NPV was verified to determine economic loss caused on account of deforestation. Hence, we deem it proper to extract the relevant paragraph of the said order and it reads as under: -
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 808 - S H Kapadia - Full Document

Goa Foundation vs Union Of India & Ors on 11 November, 2013

ii. Secondly, it has been noticed that appellant is attempting to take a contrary stand on the issue of criteria for the identification of forests, namely, suggesting a change in criteria for the identification of deemed forests under private ownership. On the one hand, the appellant is challenging the criteria adopted by the Sawant and Karapurkar Committees for the identification of inter alia private forests and on the other hand has relied on the same criteria adopted by these two committees for the identification of forests, including private forests, before the Tribunal, as has been observed by the Tribunal in its judgement rendered in O.A. No.22 of 2013 on 22/01/2015 54 in the matter of Goa Foundation v Union of India & Others and in O.A. No.479 of 2018 in the matter of Goa Foundation v State of Goa & Others. Thus, appellant cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate.
Supreme Court of India Cites 48 - Cited by 217 - Full Document

The Tata Housing Development Co. Ltd. ... vs The Goa Foundation And Ors. on 17 September, 2003

“13. From a bare perusal of the Third Interim Report, it would appear that the three criteria laid down in the Second Interim Report of the Sawant Committee have been given a complete go- by and in relation to the appellants' plot altogether different criteria have been adopted. The course adopted by the Committee in taking into consideration different criteria while examining an individual case of the appellants' plot was wholly unwarranted, especially when the Committee in its Report has not assigned any reason for making the deviation.”
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 3 - B N Agrawal - Full Document

Goa Foundation & Anr vs State Of Goa & Anr on 29 March, 2016

ii. Secondly, it has been noticed that appellant is attempting to take a contrary stand on the issue of criteria for the identification of forests, namely, suggesting a change in criteria for the identification of deemed forests under private ownership. On the one hand, the appellant is challenging the criteria adopted by the Sawant and Karapurkar Committees for the identification of inter alia private forests and on the other hand has relied on the same criteria adopted by these two committees for the identification of forests, including private forests, before the Tribunal, as has been observed by the Tribunal in its judgement rendered in O.A. No.22 of 2013 on 22/01/2015 54 in the matter of Goa Foundation v Union of India & Others and in O.A. No.479 of 2018 in the matter of Goa Foundation v State of Goa & Others. Thus, appellant cannot be permitted to approbate and reprobate.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 28 - R Gogoi - Full Document
1   2 Next