R.G. Nagia Vs. K

R.G. Nagia vs K

Type Court Judgment Court Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi Decided Jul 04, 2006

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/54848

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/54848
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Judge: S Raju, D a N.D.
Decided On: Jul 04, 2006
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

R.G. Nagia

Respondent

Excerpt

1. by way of this review application, review applicant seeks review of our order dated 20.04.2006 passed in ta-5/2000.2. we have perused our order dated 20.04.2006 and do not find either any error apparent on the face of record or discovery of any new and important material, which even after exercise of due diligence, was not available to the review applicant. if the review applicant is not satisfied with the order passed by the tribunal remedy lies elsewhere.the apex court in union of india v. tarit ranjan das 2004 scc (l&s) 160, observed as under: 13. the tribunal passed the impugned order by reviewing the earlier order. a bare reading of the two orders shows that the order in review application was in complete variation and disregard of the earlier order and the strong as well as sound reasons contained therein whereby the original application was rejected. the scope for review is rather limited and it is not permissible for the forum hearing the review application to act as an appellate authority in respect of the original order by a fresh order and rehearing of the matter to facilitate a change of opinion on merits. the tribunal seems to have transgressed its jurisdiction in dealing with the review petition as if it was hearing an original application. this aspect has also not been noticed by the high court.

Full Judgment

1. By way of this Review Application, review applicant seeks review of our order dated 20.04.2006 passed in TA-5/2000.

2. We have perused our order dated 20.04.2006 and do not find either any error apparent on the face of record or discovery of any new and important material, which even after exercise of due diligence, was not available to the review applicant. If the review applicant is not satisfied with the order passed by the Tribunal remedy lies elsewhere.

The Apex Court in Union of India v. Tarit Ranjan Das 2004 SCC (L&S) 160, observed as under: 13. The Tribunal passed the impugned order by reviewing the earlier order. A bare reading of the two orders shows that the order in review application was in complete variation and disregard of the earlier order and the strong as well as sound reasons contained therein whereby the original application was rejected. The scope for review is rather limited and it is not permissible for the forum hearing the review application to act as an appellate authority in respect of the original order by a fresh order and rehearing of the matter to facilitate a change of opinion on merits. The Tribunal seems to have transgressed its jurisdiction in dealing with the review petition as if it was hearing an original application. This aspect has also not been noticed by the High Court.

Same Court & Year Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi · 2006 Same Parties R.G. Nagia vs K Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge S Raju, D a N.D.