Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Ramji Veerji Patel & Ors. Vs Revenue Divisional Officer & Ors. (Supreme Court of India)
Appeal Number : Civil Appeal No. 137 of 2003
Date of Judgement/Order : 02/11/2011
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Mr. Pallav Shishodia, learned senior counsel for the appellants raised two-fold contention. His first contention was that the appellants’ objections about the availability of land belonging to TELC which is situated behind the existing depot of the Corporation and was available for sale were not rationally considered by the RDO and the Government. He submitted that the livelihood of about 40 members of the family was directly affected by the compulsory acquisition of their land and, therefore, the objections ought to have been considered in a reasonable manner more so since the public purpose for which the appellants’ land was sought to be acquired could have been easily met by the acquisition of the TELC’s land. In this regard, he referred to three decisions of this Court, namely, (i) Delhi Administration v. Gurdip Singh Uban and Others1, (ii) Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Ltd. v. Darius Shapur Chenai and others and (iii) Radhy Shyam (Dead) Through LRs. and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others.

The second contention of the learned senior counsel for appellants was that the acquisition of the appellants’ land by the Government was for the purposes of the Corporation and the Corporation being a ‘company’ for the purposes of the Act, the contemplated in Part VII of the Act was required to be mandatorily followed and since the said procedure has not been followed, the acquisition is bad in law. In this regard, Mr. Pallav Shishodia placed reliance upon a decision of this Court in State of Punjab and Others v. Raja Ram and others.

REPORT ABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

0 Comments

  1. Shubhabrata says:

    Sir,
    The Hon’ble Supreme Court was probably referring to Section 3 (e) of The Land Acqisition Act,1894 (Which excludes Governmental company from the defination of Company) and not “Section 3 (e)” of Companies Act,1956 while concluding that Food Corporation Of India (FCI) is not covered under the amended defination of ‘Company’ as provided in The Land Acqisition Act,1894.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031