Murlidhar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Murlidhar vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jul 30, 2012

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1048111

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1048111
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Jul 30, 2012
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Murlidhar

Advocate Shri. Anubhav Jain

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

w.p.no.11551/2012 30.7.2012 shri anubhav jain, counsel for petitioners.it was submitted by shri jain that the colonizer, though established a colony namely deepshree colony, but has not been provided necessary amenities like approach road, water facility, etc.in this regard he has drawn our attention to annexure p-7 dated 10.2.2010 issued by the deputy director, town and country planning, khandwa. it was also submitted by him that the colonizer has started construction on the land, which was reserved for below poverty line persons, without providing such amenities. considering aforesaid, we direct issuance of notice to the respondents to show cause, as to why this petition be not admitted. process fee within a period of one week by regd. a/d mode. notice be made returnable before next date of hearing. be listed for hearing on 5.9.2012. till next date of hearing, it is directed that respondent nos.4 & 5 shall not alienate the suit property and shall not raise any construction on the land, which is reserved for informal sector. c.c., as per rules. (krishn kumar lahoti) (smt.vimla jain) judge judge m.

Full Judgment

W.P.No.11551/2012 30.7.2012 Shri Anubhav Jain, counsel for petitioneRs.It was submitted by Shri Jain that the colonizer, though established a colony namely Deepshree Colony, but has not been provided necessary amenities like approach road, water facility, etc.In this regard he has drawn our attention to Annexure P-7 dated 10.2.2010 issued by the Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning, Khandwa.

It was also submitted by him that the colonizer has started construction on the land, which was reserved for below poverty line persons, without providing such amenities.

Considering aforesaid, we direct issuance of notice to the respondents to show cause, as to why this petition be not admitted.

Process fee within a period of one week by Regd.

A/D mode.

Notice be made returnable before next date of hearing.

Be listed for hearing on 5.9.2012.

Till next date of hearing, it is directed that respondent nos.4 & 5 shall not alienate the suit property and shall not raise any construction on the land, which is reserved for informal sector.

C.C., as per rules.

(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) JUDGE JUDGE M.

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2012 Same Parties Murlidhar vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Land Acquisition