Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1
PETITIONER:
ARJUNA & OTHERS
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
DATE OF JUDGMENT02/05/1995
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
HANSARIA B.L. (J)
CITATION:
1995 SCC Supl. (3) 19 1995 SCALE (3)692
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
O R D E R
The High Court allowed the appeal on the ground that
the private respondents are within the ceiling limit and,
therefore, allotment of the surplus land to the respondents
is illegal. In ground No. 5 of the special leave petition it
was specifically pleaded that the respondents are declared
to be a surplus holder and the excess land was assigned to
the appellants. By order dated March 22, 1995, we had
directed both the parties to produce the return filed by the
respondents. The appellants were directed to get the
certified copy of the said return as well as the copy of the
return filed by the respondents.
It is stated by Dr. N.N. Ghatate, learned senior
counsel for the respondents, that through Mr. S.V.
Deshpande, the learned instructing counsel, had written
letters to the party he has not received any response. Mr.
Parekh, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, stated
that they could not procure the certified copy.
In that view of the matter, ground No. 5 has remained
undisputed. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed on that
terms and the order of the High Court is set aside. In case
the respondents were declared to be within the ceiling
limit, liberty is given to them to file a review petition
within a period of two months from today. No costs.