Gujarat High Court High Court

Dipenbhai vs Ms on 27 September, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Dipenbhai vs Ms on 27 September, 2010
Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Kureshi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

MCA/2006/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR REVIEW No. 2006 of 2009
 

In


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1562 of 2009
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2624 of 2009
 

 
=================================================


 

DIPENBHAI
RAMESHBHAI PATEL, PRESIDENT, NANA GUJARIYA GROUP - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

DISTRICT
COLLECTOR & 3 - Opponent(s)
 

=================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
MEHUL S SHAH for Applicant(s) : 1,                                   
                                                         MR SURESH M
SHAH for Applicant(s) : 1, 
MS KRINA P CALLA, AGP for Opponent(s) :
4, 
=================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 27/09/2010  
ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)

This
application has been preferred for review and recall of the order
dated 21.8.2009 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1562 of 2009.

The
learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the proceedings
initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, submitted that the
notification under Section 10 was issued on 21.5.2000 and the
possession of the acquired land was taken on 18.12.2000. Even the
notification under Section 9 was issued on 24.12.2000. Once such
action having taken, the question of cancellation of the grant of
land after two years on 18.1.2002 was uncalled for; that was not
maintainable and hence, having acquired, the appellant was entitled
for compensation.

Ms
Krina P Calla, learned AGP appearing on behalf of the respondents
sought for and is allowed a week’s time to address the Court on
merit. If so required, the Court may recall the order and decide the
appeal on merit on the next date.

Post
the matter on 4th October, 2010 within five cases in the
first board.

[S.J.

MUKHOPADHAYA, CJ.]

[AKIL
KURESHI, J.]

sundar/-

   

Top