RAJIV JAIN . vs STATE OF U.P. Q — C.A. No. 1423/2013
Case under Section III-A. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010057082008
Filing Date
26-Feb-2008
Registration No
C.A. No. 1423/2013
Diary Number
5708/2008
Order Date
03-Aug-2017
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 01-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAJIV JAIN .
Adv. T. MAHIPAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF U.P. Q
Adv. RAVINDRA KUMAR (Dead / Retired / Elevated) GARVESH KABRA MUKESH K. GIRI VINAY GARG[R-1] VINAY GARG[R-2]
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
03-Aug-2017
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Aug-2017
Ordinary
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar
-
27-Apr-2015
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
05-Feb-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Aug-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
17-Apr-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Mar-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Feb-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Nov-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Oct-2010
ROPView PDF
-
21-Sep-2010
ROPView PDF
-
05-Aug-2010
ROPView PDF
-
29-Apr-2010
ROPView PDF
-
09-Mar-2010
ROPView PDF
-
11-Jan-2010
ROPView PDF
-
13-Nov-2009
ROPView PDF
-
06-Nov-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
09-Oct-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Aug-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
07-Aug-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Jul-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Apr-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
19-Mar-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
02-Feb-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Dec-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Oct-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Oct-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-Sep-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Aug-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Aug-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
10-Jul-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
15-May-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
09-May-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
26-Feb-2008
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 1423/2013
Summary: Civil Appeal No. 1423/2013 - Rajiv Jain v. State of U.P. The Supreme Court dismissed all three consolidated appeals (1423, 1424, and 1436 of 2013) on August 3, 2017. The appeals concerned a land acquisition matter where an award had been passed, possession taken, and development completed. The court found no grounds to interfere with the lower court's judgment, holding that the appellants were responsible for not receiving compensation since they had sought reference for enhancement under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court clarified that the 2013 Fair Compensation and Transparency Act did not apply, and directed appellants to pursue compensation disbursement through the reference court if an award had been passed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts