w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Delhi Development Authority v/s Golcha Theatres and Others


Company & Directors' Information:- DEVELOPMENT CORPN PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U13209WB1939PTC009750

    L.P.A. No. 55 of 1983

    Decided On, 07 December 1990

    At, High Court of Delhi

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.K. CHAWLA & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR

    For the Appearing Parties : A.K. Sikri, Daljit Singh, M.S. Vinayak, Aaila Nair, Advocates.



Judgment Text

M.K. CHAWLA, J.


M/s. Golcha Theatres and its three partners are the owners of the property bearing Nos. 1252/1148, and 1253/1148, situated at Gurdwara Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi. They purchased this built-up property sometime in the year 1962 for the purpose of constructing a cinema after demolishing the existing structure. They moved an application seeking permission therefore but it was declined by the Delhi Development Authority. Thereafter, the petitioner wrote to the Municipal Corporation of the Delhi for allowing them to put the property to commercial use. This permission was also refused on the short ground that the draft Zonal Development Plan of this area has not yet been published.


2. On 10.7.65, the Delhi Development Authority, published the draft Zonal Plan for Karol Bagh Zone. In the said plan, the land use of the property in question was shown as commercial upto a depth of 30 ft. of the plot. As the petitioner had no grievance against the draft Zonal Plan, they did not file any objection under Section 10 (3) of the Delhi Development Act, 1957.


3. Later on, the Lt. Governor of Delhi on 14.9.67 issued a preliminary Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act stating therein that the property of the petitioner was likely to be needed for a public purpose, namely, "planned development of Delhi". It was so done on the recommendation of the Board constituted under Rule 8 of the Delhi Development (Master Plan and Zonal Development Plan) Rules framed under Section 56 of the Act. Even though the Notification under Section 4 did not specifically state the particular public purpose for which the land was required, the petitioner, however, came to know that the land in question was being acquired for the construction of a bus terminal. The petitioner filed objections to the Notification under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act.


4. The Lt. Governor then issued Notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act on 7.8.69. Thereafter, notices under Sections 9 and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act were sent to the petitioner informing that the Government intends to take possession of the property and that the claims to compensation be made by all interested persons.


5. At this stage, the petitioner challenged the acquisition proceedings on a variety of grounds by filing the writ petition on 12.12.70 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Notification dated 7.8.69 issued by the Delhi Administration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and the notices issued under Section 9 and 10 of the said Act, being invalid, illegal, mala fide and ultra vires. On being heard, the petition was accepted by Avadh Behari, J. on 18.11.82. The Notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 23.7.69 published on 7.8.69 and the notices issued under Section 9 and 10 were quashed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.


6. Aggrieved from the said order, the Delhi Development Authority has filed the present Letter's Patent Appeal on various grounds praying for the setting aside of the impugned judgment dated 18.11.82


7. Before the start of the hearing of the appeal, learned Counsel for the respondent M/s Golcha Theatres raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the appeal by the Delhi Development Authority. His contention is that the land in dispute was acquired by the Lieutenant Governor, Delhi for and on behalf of the Central Government for the planned development of Delhi. The Central Government has not filed any appeal against the judgment of Avadh Behari, J. dt. 18.11.82 whereby the Notification under Section 6 and the notices under Sections 9 and 10 were quashed. The Delhi Development Authority is neither a person aggrieved nor have they suffered any legal injury. The appeal on its behalf thus merits dismissal on this ground alone.


8. The submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the land in dispute was acquired for the purpose of construction of a bus terminal which purpose is also mentioned in the Zonal Development Plan issued by the DDA. Ultimately the possession of the land was meant to be delivered to the DDA and as such the appellant is very much interested in the land in question. The appellant is thus an aggrieved person and as such has the right to maintain the appeal.


9. In our opinion, the preliminary objection of the respondent has force. It is not disputed that after the issuance of the Notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act the Central Government has not taken possession of the land nor has it been delivered to the DDA. Section 15 of the Delhi Development Act lays down:


Compulsory Acquisition of Land


1. "If in the opinion of the Central Government, any land is required for the purpose of development or for any other purpose, under this Act, the Central Government may acquire such land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1) of 1894.


2. Where any land has been acquired by the Central Government, that Government may, after it has taken possession of the land, transfer the land to the Development or any local authority for the purpose for which the land has been acquired on the payment by the authority or the local authority of the compensation awarded under that Act and all the charges incurred by the Government in connection with the acquisition."


10. It is the common case of the parties that till date, the Central Government has neither taken possession of the land nor has it been transferred to the Delhi Development Authority or any other local authority. It is not clear from the pleadings of the parties that after acquiring the property in dispute the intention of the Central Government was to hand it over to the DDA only, or to any other local authority including the Municipal Corporation of Delhi or to NDMC. So long as possession of the land is not delivered to the DDA, it cannot be said to have any control over the land. Merely because the DDA feels disappointed with the result of the writ petition, it cannot come within the definition of aggrieved person. The impugned order has neither caused to the DDA a legal injury nor has it wrongfully deprived it of any property. In fact the DDA does not come into the picture at all. No right or interest in the land has accrued in its favour.


11. It may be that the in the writ petition the DDA was arrayed as one of the respondents, but ultimately no relief was claimed or granted against this respondent. It was only a proforma respondent and was not a party to the lis. It was only on that account that the DDA in its counter to the writ petition, raised the preliminary objection that as no specific relief had been claimed against it, the petition merits dismissal against them.


12. That may be so. However, the fact remains that the Central Government whose orders of acquisition have been quashed, did not challenge the impugned order. The third party who has no interest in the land cannot be allowed to continue to pursue the remedy, for and on behalf of the aggrieved party i.e., the Central Government.


13. A similar situation arose in the case reported as 1959 (1) QB 384, wherein the local planning authority feeling aggrieved from an order of the summary Court filed an appeal. Their locus

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

standi to file an appeal was questioned: "Accordingly, I am satisfied that a mere annoyance that what was thought to be a breach of planning control turned out not to be a breach of planning control and, equally, the mere fact that this authority, charged with certain duties under the Act, has been frustrated in the performance of what it though was its public duty, are not, of themselves considerations sufficient to make the local planning authority an aggrieved person". 14. This judgment deals with a situation similar to the present situation and its ratio suggests that the stand of the DDA is untenable. We, therefore, hold that the DDA has no locus standi to file and maintain the present appeal. 15. In the result, we dismiss the appeal, leaving parties to bear there own costs.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

07-07-2020 The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, Bengaluru & Another Versus Byamma & Others High Court of Karnataka
24-06-2020 Barak Valley Hills Tribes Development Council, Assam Versus State of Assam & Others High Court of Gauhati
23-06-2020 Swetha Shri Selvakumar Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
23-06-2020 P.S. Srinivas Rao Versus 60th Padubidri Grama Panchayath, Represented by its Panchayath Development Officer & Others High Court of Karnataka
18-06-2020 N. Krishnamoorthy Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
12-06-2020 Dr. D. Euvalingam & Others Versus The Secretary to Government, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-06-2020 Awadhesh Kumar Versus Multi State Co-operative Land Development Bank, Patna & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
01-06-2020 Nagen Chandra Das & Others Versus The State of Assam, Rep. by the Comm. And Secy., Deptt. of Urban Development Deptt., Dispur & Others High Court of Gauhati
01-06-2020 K. Shanthi Versus The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-06-2020 M/s SGS Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of Bihar Urban Development Agency BUDA, Patna & Another High Court of Judicature at Patna
01-06-2020 Padmavani Educational & Charitable Trust, Rep.by its Joint Managing Trustee, Salem Versus The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep.its Secretary, Housing & Urban Development Department, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-05-2020 N. Vijayakumary Versus The Kerala Land Development Corporation Limited, Registered Office Thrissur, Represented By Its Managing Director & Another High Court of Kerala
15-05-2020 The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Hubandary, Dairy Development & Fisheries Department, Mantralaya & Another Versus Madhukar Suryabhan Ingale In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
08-05-2020 V. Srinivas Chowdary & Others Versus State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Department of Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravati & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
08-05-2020 Gaddam Koteswaramma Versus State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Secretariat & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
08-05-2020 Ravipati Nagasarala & Others Versus State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, Secretariat, Amaravati & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
05-05-2020 Prabhu & Others Versus The State of Karnataka, by its Secretary Department of Housing & Urban Development, Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench At Dharwad
30-04-2020 Romesh Kumar Bajaj Versus Delhi Development Authority High Court of Delhi
30-04-2020 Delhi Development Authority & Others Versus Pushpa Lata & Others High Court of Delhi
27-04-2020 Aishwarya Atul Pusalkar Versus Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority & Others Supreme Court of India
27-04-2020 P. Damodhar Versus The Telangana State Industrial Development Corporation Limited rep by its Joint Managing Director, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
17-04-2020 South Durban Community Environmental Alliance Versus MEC For Economic Development, Tourism And Environmental Affairs Kwazulu-Natal Provincial Government & Another Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
08-04-2020 Civilian Welfare & Development Trust (Regd.) Versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Others High Court of Delhi
04-04-2020 ABC Versus Union of India, Represented by Secretary, Ministry of Women & Child Development, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
20-03-2020 Prem Devi Versus Delhi Development Authority Through Its Vice Chairman Vikas Sadan, New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-03-2020 Raj Kumar Versus Delhi Development Authority Vikas Sadan Near Ina Market New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-03-2020 Ritesh Rajendra Thakur Versus State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
18-03-2020 West Bengal Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. & Others Versus M/s. Sona Promoters Pvt. Ltd. & Others Supreme Court of India
17-03-2020 Chetan Prabhakar Rajwade Versus The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Tribal Development Department & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
17-03-2020 M/s. Rite Choice Foundations and Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Rep., by its Managing Director, C.K. Sridhar Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by its Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Secretariat, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-03-2020 Ram Pralhad Khatri & Others Versus State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
13-03-2020 Nagrik Samanvya Samiti & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra, Through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
12-03-2020 Nitin Kumar Jain Versus Union of India, Through, Human Resources Development, Department of School Education & Literacy, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
11-03-2020 Jerome Velho Versus State of Goa, through the Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
11-03-2020 S.S. Sundaresan Versus State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
10-03-2020 V.S. Senthil Kumar Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-03-2020 Milind Bhimsing Shirsath Versus The State of Maharashtra Through its Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
06-03-2020 Choda Bhutia & Others Versus State of Sikkim, Through the Secretary, Human Resources & Development Department Government of Sikkim & Others High Court of Sikkim
06-03-2020 Indore Development Authority Versus Manoharlal & Others Supreme Court of India
06-03-2020 V. Gurusamy Versus The Secretary to Government, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
06-03-2020 Om Prakash Swami Versus Haryana State Industrial And Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-03-2020 Ravindra Manik Shinde & Another Versus State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya & Another High Court of Judicature at Bombay
04-03-2020 R. Praveen Versus The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-03-2020 Madhya Pradesh Housing & Infrastructure Development Board & Another Versus Vijay Bodana & Others Supreme Court of India
03-03-2020 State of West Bengal Versus PAM Development Private Limited High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
03-03-2020 Abdul Salam & Others Versus Delhi Development Authority & Another High Court of Delhi
02-03-2020 Birru Prathap Reddy & Others Versus The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, Secretariat & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
26-02-2020 Burdwan Development Authority & Others Versus Arifa Khatun & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
26-02-2020 Anil Dattatraya Girme & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra Through the Ministry of Urban Development, Mantralaya & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
26-02-2020 The Administrator, City and Industrial Development Corporation [CIDCO] & Others Versus Padmakar & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
26-02-2020 M.P. Road Development Corporation Versus Jagannath & Others High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
25-02-2020 R. Thenmozhi Versus The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Housing & Urban Development, Secretariat, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-02-2020 Rajendra K. Bhutta Versus Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority & Another Supreme Court of India
19-02-2020 Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd., R/by the Deputy Manager (Legal), Ernakulam Branch Versus R. Ranjith Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
18-02-2020 Banajit Deka Versus The Union of India, Through the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Education, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
18-02-2020 A. Ramesh, Trustee, Okkiam Thoraipakkam Vanniyakula Ksathriyar Welfare Temple Development Trust, Okkiam Thuraipakkam Village, Chennai Versus The District Revenue Officer, District Revenue Office, Kancheepuram & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-02-2020 Gram Panchayat Zinc Smelter, Panchayat Samiti Kurabad, District Udaipur Through Its Sarpanch Sarika Versus State of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department of Rural Development & Panchayati Raj, Secretariat, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur & Others High Court of Rajasthan Jodhpur Bench
13-02-2020 Narasimhan I.A.S. Educational & Charitable Trust, Rep. By its Managing Trustee N. Ranjit Versus The Member Secretary,Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Egmore & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
13-02-2020 S. Sattanathan V/S State of Tamil Nadu, Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-02-2020 G. Thamaraiselvi Versus Secretary To Government, Union of India, (Department of Higher Education), Ministry of Human Resources Development, New Delhi & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
11-02-2020 Bengal Shelter Housing Development Ltd., Kolkata Versus Smita Singh & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
11-02-2020 Ircon International Limited Versus C.R. Sons Builders & Development Pvt. Ltd. & Another High Court of Delhi
11-02-2020 K. Devadass Versus State of Tamilnadu Rep by the Secretary to Government Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department Secretariat Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
10-02-2020 M/s. Pacific Development Corporation Ltd. V/S South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Another High Court of Delhi
07-02-2020 Subramani Versus The Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-02-2020 K.M. Thamizharasu Versus The Commissioner of Rural Development Panagal Buildings Saidapet, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-02-2020 Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd. Through its Authorized Signatory V/S Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Range 12 New Delhi High Court of Delhi
04-02-2020 Mahendra Singh Thakur Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Education, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
04-02-2020 Vythiri Primary Co-operative Agricultural & Rural-Development Bank Ltd., Kalpetta P.O, Wayanad Versus T.V. Devasia Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
04-02-2020 Goa Industrial Development Corporation, through its Managing Director, Faizi O. Hashmi Versus Commissioner of Income Tax & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
03-02-2020 The Government of Tamil Nadu, Highways Department, rep. by the Divisional Engineer (H) Chennai Metropolitan Development Plan Division-1 Versus M/s. Jenefa Constructions, Civil Engineering Contractor, rep. by its Partner, M. Arunachalam High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-01-2020 K. Chelladurai Versus The Secretary to Government, Housing & Urban Development, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-01-2020 Santha Medical Foundation (a Public Charitable Trust), Rep. by its Chairman & Trustee Dr. S. Saravanan & Another Versus The Commissioner of Rural Development and Local Administration, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
29-01-2020 Sanjay Singhal & Another Versus North Goa Planning & Development Authority, Through its Member Secretary & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
29-01-2020 A.P. Shareefa Versus State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-01-2020 The Nilamangai Nagar Welfare Association, (Rego.No.81/80) Rep. By its Secretary K.Sankararama Sarma, Chennai Versus State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary, Housing and Urban Development (UDSRI) Dept., Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-01-2020 Vaikom Taluk Co-Operative Agricultural & Rural Development Bank Versus Anilkumar & Others High Court of Kerala
27-01-2020 M/s. Urban Umbrella Development And Management Company Through Its Proprietor/Authorized Signatory, Punjab V/S Pawan Lal & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
27-01-2020 Krishna Pada Poddar Versus ABS Land Development and Construction Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, Tapan Ghosh West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
27-01-2020 Desire Agro Resorts Development Pvt. Ltd. & Another Versus Pradip Kumar Halder West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
23-01-2020 Rawish Kumar Versus Union of India through the Secretary, Having it's office at Ministry of Urban Development, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Guwahati Bench Guwahati
22-01-2020 Deepak Sharma Versus Jabalpur Development Authority & Another High Court of Madhya Pradesh
21-01-2020 The Karnataka State Seeds Development Corporation Limited & Another Versus H.L. Kaveri & Others Supreme Court of India
20-01-2020 Dr. Johny Cyriac Versus The Ministry of Human Resource Development, Govt. of India, New Delhi, Represented by Its Principal Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
20-01-2020 Meerut Development Authority Meerut Versus M/s Civil Engineering Construction Corporation & Others High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
20-01-2020 Bhubaneswar Development Authority Versus Sri Brahmananda Hota Supreme Court of India
20-01-2020 Deepsinh G. Rathod Versus District Development Officer & Others High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
17-01-2020 Dr. Indira Pal & Another Versus Samar Nag, Managing Director, Bengal Shelter Housing Development Limited West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
16-01-2020 Pratima Choudhury & Another Versus Bengal Shelter Housing Development Ltd. & Others West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Kolkata
13-01-2020 Narayan Sarkar & Another Versus The General Manager, Tripura Scheduled Caste Co-operative Development Corporation Ltd., West Tripura & Another Tripura State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Agartala
13-01-2020 C.N. Rajaram Versus Tamil Nadu Adi Dravidar Housing & Development Corporation Limited, Rep. by its Managing Director & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-01-2020 T.D. Sadasivam Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Housing & Urban Development, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
09-01-2020 Atul Kumar Singh Versus State of Bihar Through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Govt of Bihar, Patna High Court of Judicature at Patna
07-01-2020 Haryana Urban Development Authority Versus Bindu Bansal & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
07-01-2020 Haryana Urban Development Authority Versus Rajnish Gupta & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-01-2020 S. Meerabai Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-01-2020 Mukesh Gupta & Others Versus Delhi Development Authority High Court of Delhi
03-01-2020 M/s. Confluence Petroleum India Ltd., Represented by its Sales Manager N. Murugan Versus The Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu, Housing & Urban Development Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-01-2020 V. Sreenivasagam Versus Vannia Community Development Trust, Rep By Its Manging Trustee, N.V. Boopalan High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-01-2020 H.P. Housing & Urban Development Authority Versus Som Dutt Vasudeva Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Shimla


LawyerServices is a Premium Legal Tech solution.


Lawyers, Law Firms, Government Departments and Corporates rely on us for, Workflow Automation, Data Aggregation, Timely Updates, Case Management, Intelligent Research, Latest Legal Data Updates and a LOT more!

If you are a legal professional, CONTACT US, in order to see how our UNIQUE solution can benefit your organization.

Features Intro Close Box