Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA versus STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS.

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


National Highways Authority of India v. State of U.P. and others. - WRIT - C No. 65140 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 3977 (4 October 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court no.1

Civil Misc. Writ Petition no.65140 of 2005

National Highways Authority of India

Vs.

The State of U.P. and others.

                     ----

Hon'ble Yatindra Singh,J.

Hon'ble R.K.Rastogi,J.

1. The counsel for the petitioner is permitted to correct the description of the parties in the list of date and events.

2. National Highways Authority of India ( the Authority ) is acquiring land for widening of roads and for construction of buildings etc. In pursuance of this sale deeds are executed. The Authority purchased four properties by means of four different sale deeds dated 2.7.2002, 3.7.2002, 4.4.2002 and 9.9.2002. The Assistant Commissioner started proceedings for stamp duty under the  Stamps Act and passed orders on 18.2.2003 proposing  stamp duty on the sale deeds. The Authority filed four appeals  before the Commissioner on 26.3.2003 and these appeals are Appeals no.1071 to 1074 of 2002-03. In these appeals the petitioner  deposited 1/3rd of the amount along with the stay application. According to the petitioner no stay order was passed but after the appeals were filed no recovery proceedings took place. Subsequently, these appeals were dismissed for default on 16.2.2005. Though the petitioner  filed applications to recall those orders on the same day, yet fresh recovery proceedings were started,  hence, the present writ petition.

3. We have heard counsel for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the respondents.

4. The petitioner has already deposited 1/3rd of the amount and has filed  stay application. It has also filed  applications for restoration against the order dated 16.2.2005. Under these circumstances, it would be appropriate  to dispose of the writ petition with the observation that no recovery be proceeded with  against the petitioner  till the restoration applications as well as stay applications of the petitioner are  decided by the respondent no.2.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

Dated:4.10.2005

RPP.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.