Jitinder Singh vs. Land Acquisition Collector Ludhiana Improvement Trust

Court:Supreme Court of India
Judge:Hon'ble Unknown Judge
Case Status:Pending
Order Date:11 May 2016
CNR:SCIN010286362014

AI Summary

In a critical procedural step for a Supreme Court Civil Appeal concerning a land acquisition dispute, the Registrar's Court noted that both the appellant and a respondent failed to file their statements of case within the statutory period. This order highlights the strict adherence to court rules and directs the case to be listed before the Hon'ble Court for further proceedings, signifying potential delays due to non-compliance.

Ratio Decidendi:
Failure by parties (appellant and respondent) to file the statement of case within the statutory period in a Civil Appeal before the Supreme Court Registrar's Court will result in the matter being processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules.

Case Identifiers

Primary Case No:9651/2014
Case Type:Civil Appeal
Case Sub-Type:Civil Appeal - Land Acquisition Dispute
Secondary Case Numbers:9652/2014, 28636/2014
Order Date:2016-05-11
Filing Year:2014
Court:Supreme Court of India
Bench:Registrar Court
Judges:Hon'ble M V Ramesh

Petitioner's Counsel

Satish Kumar
Advocate - Appeared

Respondent's Counsel

Ritesh Khatri
Advocate - Appeared

Advocates on Record

Satish Kumar
Ritesh Khatri

eCourtsIndia AITM

Brief Facts Summary

This order pertains to Civil Appeal No(s). 9651/2014 and 9652/2014, titled Jatinder Singh and Ors. versus Land Acquisition Collector and Ors., heard by the Registrar Court of the Supreme Court of India on May 11, 2016. The Registrar noted that service of notice was complete for Respondent Nos. 1 & 3, but they did not appear. Furthermore, both the counsel for the appellant and Respondent No. 2 failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period.

Timeline of Events

2014

Civil Appeals (9651/2014 & 9652/2014) filed in the Supreme Court.

Before 2016-05-11

Notice served on Respondent Nos. 1 & 3; appellant and Respondent No. 2 failed to file statement of case within statutory period.

2016-05-11

Appeals called for hearing before the Registrar.

Key Factual Findings

Service of notice is complete on Respondent Nos.1 & 3.

Source: Current Court Finding

No one has entered appearance on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 & 3.

Source: Current Court Finding

Ld. counsel for the appellant and the respondent No.2 have failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period.

Source: Current Court Finding

Primary Legal Issues

1.Procedural compliance regarding filing of statement of case in Supreme Court appeals
2.Land acquisition law (underlying matter)

Secondary Legal Issues

1.Effectiveness of notice service and non-appearance of parties

Petitioner's Arguments

The arguments are not detailed in this procedural order, but it is implied that the petitioner's side is attempting to pursue the appeal despite having failed to file their statement of case within the statutory period.

Respondent's Arguments

The arguments are not detailed. It is noted that counsel for Respondent No. 2 also failed to file the statement of case. Respondent Nos. 1 & 3, despite complete notice, did not enter an appearance.

Court's Reasoning

The Registrar's Court noted that service of notice was complete on Respondent Nos. 1 & 3, yet no one appeared for them. Crucially, both the counsel for the appellant and Respondent No. 2 failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period. Given these procedural defaults, the Court decided that the matters must be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules for further directions.

Judicial Philosophy Indicators:
  • Strict Adherence to Procedure
Order Nature:Procedural
Disposition Status:Pending

Impugned Orders

High Court (Punjab)
Case: CRN-3469-2014
Date: 2014-05-19

Specific Directions

  1. 1.Matters shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules.

Precedential Assessment

Non-Binding (Procedural)

This is a Registrar's procedural order addressing a routine default in filing, rather than laying down a substantive legal principle.

Tips for Legal Practice

1.Advocates must strictly adhere to the statutory timelines for filing statements of case in the Supreme Court.
2.Ensure all named respondents have entered appearance and are represented to avoid ex-parte proceedings, even if service is complete.
3.Procedural defaults in the Registrar's Court can lead to delays and the matter being listed before a regular bench for further orders, potentially increasing litigation costs.

Legal Tags

Supreme Court Civil Appeal Procedure Non-ComplianceRegistrar Court Order Statement of Case FailureLand Acquisition Dispute Procedural AdjournmentSupreme Court Rules Filing Deadlines ComplianceConsequences of Failing to File Statement of Case

Disclaimer: eCourtsIndia (ECI) is not a lawyer and this analysis is generated by ECI AI, it might make mistakes. This is not a legal advice. Please consult with a qualified legal professional for matters requiring legal expertise.

Order Issued After Hearing

Purpose:

Case Registered

Listed On:

13 Oct 2014

Original Order Copy

Get a certified copy of this order

Download True Copy

Order Text

ITEM NO.99 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION IV

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. M V RAMESH

Civil Appeal No(s). 9651/2014

JATINDER SINGH AND ORS Appellant(s)

VERSUS

LAND ACQUISTION COLLECTOR AND ORS Respondent(s)

WITH

C.A. No. 9652/2014 (With Interim Relief and Office Report)

Date : 11/05/2016 This appeal was called on for hearing today.

For Appellant(s)

Mr. Satish Kumar,Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Mr. Ritesh Khatri,Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Service of notice is complete on the respondent Nos.1 & 3, but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Ld.counsel for the appellant and the respondent No.2 have failed to file the statement of case within the statutory period. Viewed thus, the matters shall be processed for listing before the Hon'ble Court as per rules.

Digitally signed by Sushma Kumari Bajaj Date: 2016.05.12 15:44:59 TLT Reason: Signature Not Verified

(M V RAMESH) Registrar

SB

Share This Order

Case History of Orders

Order(5) - 11 May 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Viewing

Order(6) - 11 May 2016

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(7) - 11 May 2016

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(1) - 8 Oct 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(2) - 8 Oct 2014

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(3) - 8 Oct 2014

Office Report - of Main Case

Click to view

Order(4) - 8 Oct 2014

ROP - of Main Case

Click to view