Ram Ratan Vs. Emperor

Ram Ratan vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Jan 06, 1922

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/469815

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/469815
Court: Allahabad
Judge: Stuart, J.
Decided On: Jan 06, 1922
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Works of Defence Act (VII of 1903) - Platform in existence in Cantonment area for 30 years--Demolition--Acquiescence. -

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ram Ratan

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Reported In: 65Ind.Cas.855

Excerpt

works of defence act (vii of 1903) - platform in existence in cantonment area for 30 years--demolition--acquiescence. - stuart, j.1. the first point to decide is the age of the platform. the documentary evidence shows that it was in existence in 1902 and i see no reason to disbelieve the oral evidence that it has been in existence for thirty years before the date of the case. the cantonment authorities having acquiesced in its existence for that period cannot be permitted to demolish it now. the magistrate has made a reference to the defense zone. act vii of 1903 does not afford any authority for demolition of the platform and, in any circumstances, as it is only about three feet high, its existence cannot be considered a danger to the defence of agra. i set aside the conviction and sentence accordingly. the fine, if paid, will be refunded.

Full Judgment

Stuart, J.

1. The first point to decide is the age of the platform. The documentary evidence shows that it was in existence in 1902 and I see no reason to disbelieve the oral evidence that it has been in existence for thirty years before the date of the case. The Cantonment authorities having acquiesced in its existence for that period cannot be permitted to demolish it now. The Magistrate has made a reference to the Defense Zone. Act VII of 1903 does not afford any authority for demolition of the platform and, in any circumstances, as it is only about three feet high, its existence cannot be considered a danger to the defence of Agra. I set aside the conviction and sentence accordingly. The fine, if paid, will be refunded.

Same Parties Ram Ratan vs Emperor Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Stuart, J.

Land Acquisition