validity of the legal notice, the accused has raised
three objections. Firstly, it is argued that the notice and corrigendum were
issued in the name ... notice within
the statutory period. Therefore, the earlier notice cannot be treated as legally
non-existent merely because a corrigendum notice was subsequently issued
conferencing.
The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the
corrigendum notice issued by the respondent no. 2 - the Jharkhand
State Food and Civil ... convened on
04.05.2020 via video conferencing. Thereafter, by way of
Corrigendum Notice dated 19.05.2020 uploaded in the website of
NeML as well
India, hence the complainant got issued corrigendum
notice dated 7.1.2016 to the earlier notice dated
16.12.2016, the corrigendum notice was received by the
counsel ... India, hence the complainant got issued corrigendum
notice dated 7.1.2016 to the earlier notice dated
16.12.2016, the corrigendum notice was received by the
counsel
seven days from the date of receipt of the said corrigendum notice,
however, no reply was given despite receipt of the corrigendum notice ... after a period of
three years got issued Ex.A21, corrigendum notice and got
9
LNA, J
S.A.No.82 of 2025
filed
this stage, it must be mentioned
that the KIADB has issued Corrigendum Notice dated
27.08.2012, and this perhaps is consequent to the
orders of this ... included. This
Court must also observe that this change vide the
Corrigendum Notice dated 27.08.2012 is without
change in the total extent acquired
proceedings dated 31.03.2018, as well as the corrigendum to notice dated
31.03.2018, are under challenge in the present writ petitions.
2.The petitioner submitted ... impugned notice as well as the corrigendum to notice are challenged on the
ground that it was issued beyond the period of limitation, and therefore
receipt of the said notice. Due to the
typographical error in the said notice, the accused
has sent Corrigendum notice on 11.04.2023.
Inspite of receiving ... respectively, Ex.P6 is the Corrigendum notice dt:
8 C.C.No.10157/2023
KABC030173532023
11.04.2023, Ex.P7 is the postal receipt
accused
address and the same was served and also issued
corrigendum notice on 14.04.2022 and the said notice is
also served. The accused ... issued the
legal notice to the accused on 24.03.2022 and corrigendum
notice on 14.04.2022 through RPAD and the same were
served on the accused
Complainant sent a corrigendum
notice to the Accused. The notice and corrigendum notices sent
to the 1st address of the Accused were duly served ... Complainant got issued legal notice through RPAD on 5.1.2018,
through his counsel to the Accused. The notice and
corrigendum notices sent
notice and the said notice was
duly served on the accused. Subsequently, the Complainant noticed
that there was a typographical error in the Legal Notice ... said notice was duly served on the accused. She deposed that
subsequently, she noticed that there was a typographical error in the
Legal Notice about
