Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

NAHAR SINGH versus STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

Decided
28 November 1995
Judges listed
K. RAMASWAMY, S.B. MAJMUDAR (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Appeal(s) allowed

Citations

Official
[1995] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. 754 · 1995 INSC 802

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

Delay condoned. Substitution allowed.

p. 755, margin A

Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, "the Act") was published on June 25, 1974. Declaration under Section 6 was published on July 3, 1974 dispensing with the enquiry under Section 5-A after the Governor had exercised his power under Section 17 ( 4) of the Act.

p. 755, margin A

It is not clear from the record that the possession of the land was taken after 15 days from the date of service of the notice under Section 9 on the appellant. The appellant has asserted that he has been in possession of the land but no counter has been filed. In support thereof, the appellant has also placed on record the resolution dated December 27, 1977 of Gram Sabha stating that the other land has already been allotted to 30 eligible persons of the village and the land in question no longer is necessary. After the Amendment Act 68 of 1984 was brought into force w.e.f. September 24, 1984, Section 11-A operates in the field. It envisages that if the award under Section 11 has not been made within two years from the date of coming into force of the Amendment Act, all the proceedings under Sections 4 and 6 shall stand lapsed. In view of the fact that no steps appeared to have been taken within time, the notification under Section 4(1) and declaration under Section 6 no longer subsist.

p. 755, margin B

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. No costs. T.N.A. Appeal allowed.

p. 755, margin E