A.B.LALL SRIVASTAVA vs STATE OF U.P.. — SLP(C) No. 22321/2008

Case under Section XI. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010224302008

Filing Date

07-Aug-2008

Registration No

SLP(C) No. 22321/2008

Diary Number

22430/2008

Order Date

12-Sep-2011

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 05-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section XI

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.A.B.LALL SRIVASTAVA

    Adv. PRASHANT CHAUDHARY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF U.P..

    Adv. T. N. SINGH GUNNAM VENKATESWARA RAO RAKESH UTTAMCHANDRA UPADHYAY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Sep-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 05-Sep-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 02-Sep-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 24-Aug-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  6. 25-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 06-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 29-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 13-Jan-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 07-Dec-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 03-May-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 12-Mar-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 01-Feb-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 15-Dec-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 12-Nov-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 06-Oct-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 31-Mar-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 06-Feb-2009

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 29-Aug-2008

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  20. 07-Aug-2008

    Case filed

    Registration No. SLP(C) No. 22321/2008

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: SLP(C) No. 22321/2008 — A.B. Lall Srivastava v. State of U.P. Hearing Date: 12 September 2011 Outcome: The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition. The Court upheld the Commissioner's finding that respondent No. 5 (Jugal Kishore Sinha) had not encroached on municipal property regarding his boundary wall, based on the Zonal Officer's detailed inquiry report. However, the Court clarified that its observations would not influence the outcome of the petitioner's ongoing civil suit (Suit No. 336 of 1999) regarding encroachment of his own property. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case