Clarification
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 03 March 2013
This query is : Resolved
In the judgment of the following case:
Supreme Court of India
Tamil Nadu Housing Board vs A. Viswam (Dead) By Lrs on 9 February, 1996
Equivalent citations: JT 1996 (2), 549 1996 SCALE (2)418
Bench: Ramaswamy, K.
the sentence quoted below forms an essential part:
"Section 12 [3] of the Act itself exempts registration of the land acquired under the Act."
Can anyone provide the text of that particular sec.12(3)?
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 04 March 2013
There is no subsection 12(3) in the Land acquisition Act upon which the judgement is.It must be a misprint.The act has only two subsections of section 12.
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 04 March 2013
Thanks for the responses of all the experts.The text of the judgment as available in the Supreme court of India webpage clearly reads 12(3).As pointed out rightly by Sri.P.Singh and concurred by Sri.Makkad the LA Act has got section 12 with only 2 sub-sections. If it is a misprint of section number, the text granting 'exemption for registration of the land acquired the Act' should be found elsewhere in that Act. It is not present anywhere in the Act. If the Hon.Judges had misquoted the Act, then ofcourse, you experts have to let me know as to which Act has such a prescription. I am surprised this has not come to the attention of anyone in this world, including Sri.R.F.Nariman, senior counsel for the respondents in this case( who could have easily won this case, by pointing out that the basic assumption or reasoning behind the ratio decidendi itself as wrong and contrary to existing law) especially considering the fact that this (erroneous?) judgment set the precedent to hundreds of others that followed in the later years.
Will someone contact Sri.R.F.Nariman and get the query clarified in the interests of Justice or kindly provide me his email id to enable me to the job?
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 04 March 2013
Online I am able to obtain a large number of pages regarding his great career and his father's and so on but not his phone number or his email id. Still, if anyone has his email id pl. let me know. Otherwise I will try for the same in some other manner! Thanks! Gentlemen!
Baskaran Kanakasabai
(Querist) 05 March 2013
Dear Sri.D.Barman,
The sentence in quotation is from the judgment referred to in my query.Therefore your question would be appropriate if it is phrased: "Which Act, the Hon.Hudge is talking about?"
By context and inference from the rest of the text of the judgment, one can say that the Judge/s must have been referring to the L A Act, 1894.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 05 March 2013
I have also gone through the judgment and have found that the judgment only mentions section 12(3) of Land Acquisition Act but the same is no existent so either the judgment has misprinting or Hon'ble judges have referred wrong section or the same is not in existence.
