Ramalakshmi Vs The Collector of Kistna

Madras High Court 8 Feb 1893 (1893) 02 MAD CK 0014
Bench: Division Bench
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Hon'ble Bench

Parker, J; Muttusami Ayyar, J

Acts Referred
  • Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 55

Judgement Text

Translate:

1. As observed by the Calcutta High Court in Taylor v. The Collector of Purnea ILR 14 Cal. 423 the Collector is not competent to refer and the

Judge is not competent to decide any question arising u/s 55 of the Act. The act confers only a special and limited jurisdiction to the Judge to deal

with two classes of questions, viz., the award of compensation and its apportionment among several claimants. When there is a difference of

opinion as to whether the whole house should be taken up by Government or not, the proper course for the party is to institute a regular suit.

2. We are of opinion that the view of the Judge is correct. The costs of this reference will be the costs of the cause.

From The Blog
Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Madras High Court to Hear School’s Plea Against State Objection to RSS Camp on Campus
Read More
Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Feb
07
2026

Court News

Delhi High Court Quashes Ban on Medical Students’ Inter-College Migration, Calls Rule Arbitrary
Read More