BILLA JAGAN MOHAN REDDY Vs. BILLA SANJEEVA REDDY
LAWS(SC)-1994-1-112
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ANDHRA PRADESH)
Decided on January 28,1994

Billa Jagan Mohan Reddy And Another Appellant
VERSUS
Billa Sanjeeva Reddy And Others Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

ABNASH CHANDER MAHAJAN VS. VIKAS PROMOTERS (P.) LTD. [LAWS(CL)-2014-1-8] [REFERRED TO]
CHAMPA KHANNA VS. TEJMAL CHOUDHURY [LAWS(CAL)-1998-7-18] [REFERRED TO]
ANJANA A GULATI VS. MEERA G PATEL [LAWS(BOM)-2008-8-174] [REFERRED TO]
SHOBH NATH SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2018-1-19] [REFERRED TO]
PRAN NATH AGGARWAL VS. FIRM RAM RATTAN OM PRAKASH [LAWS(P&H)-2004-10-15] [REFERRED TO]
MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA VS. JAGDISH THANWARDAS [LAWS(RAJ)-2000-7-80] [REFERRED TO]
MOHINDER SINGH AND ORS. VS. PARAMJIT SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2016-3-73] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMINARAIN VS. ADDL CIVIL JUDGE & ORS [LAWS(RAJ)-2014-9-193] [REFERRED]
RAJNIKANT BHOGILAL PATEL VS. LH OF DECD BHUDARBHAI HAKKABHAI BHRAMBHATT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-933] [REFERRED TO]
J JAYALALITHAA VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE [LAWS(MAD)-2009-1-401] [REFERRED TO]
SUBASH CHANDER VS. SHRI MATA VAISHNO DEVI SHRINE BOARD, KATRA [LAWS(J&K)-2007-12-32] [REFERRED TO]
ABALA MOHAPATRA VS. KRUSHNA CH. TRIPATHY AND ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-2008-12-96] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS VS. DALPAT SINGH THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND ORS [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-9-372] [REFERRED]
TOLA RAM & SONS VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2014-10-198] [REFERRED TO]
SHANGRILA FOOD PRODUCTS LTD VS. SUMERSING SHEKHAWAT [LAWS(BOM)-2004-5-45] [REFERRED TO]
K.L. Ganapathi and another VS. Ganapati Bhatta, Since dead by L.Rs. and another [LAWS(KAR)-2001-1-87] [REFERRED TO]
XEROX CORPORATION & ANR VS. P K KHANSAHEB & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2018-12-9] [REFERRED TO]
RAMDEV FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD VS. ARVINDBHAI RAMBHAI PATEL AND OTHERS [LAWS(GJH)-2015-5-117] [REFERRED]
DHANVANTRI PARIVAR TRUST VS. HEIRS AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVEGODHAN KANJI ODHAVIA &3 [LAWS(GJH)-2012-6-213] [REFERRED TO]
RUPABEN AMIT PATHAKJI VS. AMIT MANMATHCHANDRA PATHAKJI [LAWS(GJH)-2011-1-67] [REFERRED TO]
NAWAB SAHEB VS. FIROZ AHMED [LAWS(MPH)-2002-4-22] [REFERRED TO]
RAM NIWAS VS. KALU RAM [LAWS(P&H)-2012-1-114] [REFERRED TO]
SAHI RAM ADOPTED SON OF SH. NATHU RAM, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDENT OF INDUSTRIAL AREA RIICO ROAD NO.7, RANI BAZAR, BIKANER AT PRESENT RESIDING AT VILLAGE SUDASAR, TEHSIL SRI DUNGARGARH, DISTRICT BIKANER VS. BHANWARI DEVI W/O SH. NATHU RAM, RESIDENT OF INDUSTRIAL AREA, RIICO ROAD NO.7, RANI BAZAR, BIKANER [LAWS(RAJ)-2016-12-18] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAMA VS. PRITHVI SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-10-12] [REFERRED TO]
J JAYALALITHA VS. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(MAD)-2006-12-8] [REFERRED TO]
RAMCHANDRA VS. PREM BAI [LAWS(MPH)-1999-8-48] [REFERRED TO]
MEHTA VISHWANATH VS. CHANCHAL DEVI [LAWS(PAT)-2011-9-84] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN PHARMACY COUNCIL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2001-7-61] [REFERRED TO]
RAJ MAL VS. PREM NARAIN [LAWS(RAJ)-2004-3-2] [REFERRED TO]
BADAL MOHANTA & OTHERS VS. MUNIMANI MOHANTA [LAWS(ORI)-2018-12-11] [REFERRED TO]
NIHALA VS. IRSHAD [LAWS(P&H)-2017-2-71] [REFERRED TO]
JASWANTBHAI HASMUKHBHAI PATEL VS. GUJARAT STATE ELECTRICITY CORPORATION LIMITED [LAWS(GJH)-2015-4-145] [REFERRED TO]
ADWEL ADVERTISING SERVICE & ANR VS. SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(DLH)-2018-7-490] [REFERRED TO]
SUNITA CHANDRA (NOW S/S) VS. U O I THRU SECY MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT & [LAWS(ALL)-2019-4-90] [REFERRED TO]
IRIDIUM INDIA TELECOM LIMITED VS. MOTOROLA INC [LAWS(BOM)-2003-12-58] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. ABDUL RAHIM [LAWS(GAU)-2017-4-15] [REFERRED TO]
S SUBRAMANIYAN AND CO VS. STATE OF TAMILNADU [LAWS(MAD)-1998-6-119] [REFERRED TO]
HANUMAN SINGH & ANR. VS. SUMAN KANWAR & ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2013-7-300] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION VS. PUKHRAJ JAIN [LAWS(RAJ)-2000-10-34] [REFERRED 5]
ANIL VS. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2014-11-73] [REFERRED TO]
GIAN CHAND UDAR VS. JAWAHAR SINGH [LAWS(DLH)-2014-10-47] [REFERRED TO]
NEERAJ KUMAR PANDEY VS. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD [LAWS(ALL)-2009-5-891] [REFERRED TO]
KURE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2012-5-246] [REFERRED TO]
SURJIT SINGH VS. GURWANT KAUR [LAWS(SC)-2014-8-58] [REFERRED TO]
L.T. OVERSEAS NORTH AMERICA INC. VS. SACHDEVA & SONS PVT. LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2013-10-402] [REFERRED TO]
KANCHERLA SARADHA DEVI VS. SARIPELLA SIVARAMARAJU [LAWS(APH)-1995-2-58] [REFERRED TO]
V S SACHDEVA VS. M L GROVER [LAWS(DLH)-1997-5-54] [REFERRED]
HIND MOSAIC AND CEMENT WORKS VS. SHREE SAHJANAND TRADING CORPORATION [LAWS(GJH)-2012-7-208] [REFERRED TO]
BADI RAM VS. R S COMPANY [LAWS(HPH)-2001-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
HSIL LTD. VS. MANISH VIJ AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2018-1-57] [REFERRED TO]
RITA SOLANKI VS. JAI SOLANKI [LAWS(DLH)-2016-8-358] [REFERRED]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION JUNAGADH VS. SUTREJA AND CO, JUNAGADH [LAWS(GJH)-2020-10-141] [REFERRED TO]
GULBA VS. ISNA [LAWS(MPH)-2015-8-58] [REFERRED TO]
JATINDER KUMAR AND ORS VS. DEWAN DIWAKAR RAI AND ORS [LAWS(J&K)-2018-8-13] [REFERRED TO]
BANWARI LAL SHARMA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS [LAWS(CAL)-2001-9-67] [REFERRED TO]
COMMUNIDADE OF MURAD VS. ADDITIONAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER [LAWS(BOM)-1997-2-156] [REFERRED TO]
SUNITA REKHI AND ORS. VS. Y.D. PURI AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2015-12-145] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDER SHEKHAR VS. ROOP SHANKER [LAWS(RAJ)-2002-9-1] [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB WAKF BOARD VS. MURTI HANUMAN JAI [LAWS(P&H)-2007-11-70] [REFERRED TO]
NISHANT HANNAN & ORS VS. SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL COPORATION [LAWS(DLH)-2014-8-422] [REFERRED]
VIRENDRA SINGH KUSHWAHA VS. ADDL D J AGRA [LAWS(ALL)-1996-3-28] [REFERRED TO]
PARMANAND KANAIYALAL NIMBARK VS. A M C [LAWS(GJH)-2015-3-246] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHMA RANI VS. SUSHIL KUMAR DUA [LAWS(DLH)-2004-3-59] [RELIED ON]
GULSHAN RAI JAUHAR VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(GAU)-1998-4-9] [REFERRED TO]
M.S. Bhavani W/o D Suresh Babu Aged about 52 years and D. Sursh Babu S/o Dasappa Aged about. 52 years, Both are r/of No. 74 Dorchestor Avenue Warwick, Perth City West Australia-6024 VS. M.S. Raghunandan S/o late M. Srinivasa Murthy Aged about 49 [LAWS(KAR)-2012-10-221] [REFERRED TO]
MYLAN (PREVIOUSLY MATRIX) LABORATORIES LIMITED A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 VS. PFIZER INC., A US CORPORATION HAVING OFFICE AT EASTERN POINT ROAD, GROTON & OTHERS [LAWS(IP)-2013-11-5] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN RAJ VS. KARAN CHAND [LAWS(RAJ)-2002-3-1] [REFERRED]
KUPPURAMA MUDALIAR VS. KAILASAM [LAWS(MAD)-2006-6-260] [REFERRED TO]
R S MUNIRAJAN VS. JAYA THEATRE KUMBAKONAM [LAWS(MAD)-1996-7-3] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL CORP. OF AHMEDABAD VS. ORIENTAL FIRE & GIC LTD. [LAWS(GJH)-1994-4-47] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF AHMEDABAD VS. ORIENTAL FIRE AND GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED [LAWS(GJH)-1994-9-5] [REFERRED]
SHRI NARESH CHANDRA AND ANR. VS. SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2000-7-166] [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHAND PREMI VS. NAWAB KAUR [LAWS(P&H)-2003-12-72] [REFERRED TO]
BHULIA DEVI VS. SHEELA DEVI [LAWS(P&H)-1998-5-36] [REFERRED TO]
NAGINA JUDGE VS. PURSHOTAM SINGLA [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-272] [REFERRED TO]
SHANTIBAI K VARDHAN VS. MEERA G PATEL [LAWS(BOM)-2008-8-40] [REFERRED TO]
CHILKURI LAXMI VS. VINAY KUMAR BAID [LAWS(TLNG)-2019-12-253] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The office report and also the affidavit of dasti service would prove that Respondents 1, 3 and 4 have been served by usual mode and Respondents 3, 5, 6 and 7 refused to receive notice even by dasti. Under these circumstances, the service in the Special Leave Petition is complete. When the case was called, no one appeared for them, nor did they appear in person.
(2.)Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the appellants.
(3.)The appellants are the first party in the reference proceedings under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act which relates to an extent of acre (sic) 33. 09 gunthas of land in Chintagattu village, Warangal District, Andhra Pradesh, acquired due to submersion of Pochampadu Project. After determination of compensation, since the appellants claimed l/4th share therein and was objected to by the 2nd party/respondents, the Collector made a reference under Section 30 and it is now pending decision therein. The title of the appellants to claim compensation is based on the entries in the record of rights, revenue records to show pre-existing title. They sought to prove it by filing copies of family holdings, Khasra Pahnin and Pahani Patrikas for the year 1954-55 and Certified Copy of Pahani from MRO, Hasanparthy of S. Nos. 22/a, 48, 55, 56, 57/c, 58/b, 58/c for the years 1959-60 to 1969-70 and other documents. The documents were sought to be produced by an application for condonation of delay in their production under Order 13, Rule 12 (sic) of Civil Procedure Code. These documents are public documents. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the same. On revision, the High court dismissed the CRP No. 2805 of 1992 by order dated 5/07/1993. Thus this appeal by special leave.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.