Right to Property

Supreme Court clarifies compensation for land surrender and amenity development: Kukreja Construction Company vs. State of Maharashtra (2024) INSC 692 (13 September 2024)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 300A, Land Acquisition, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 126, Right to Property

Supreme Court Clarifies Compensation for Land Surrender and Amenity Development Can a landowner claim full Transferable Development Rights (TDR) for constructing amenities on surrendered land? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this crucial question, clarifying the rights of landowners under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. This judgment impacts how development rights […]

Supreme Court clarifies compensation for land surrender and amenity development: Kukreja Construction Company vs. State of Maharashtra (2024) INSC 692 (13 September 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Compensation for Land Acquisition Delay: Loonkaran Gandhi vs. State of Maharashtra (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 11, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 48-A, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 9, Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936, Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936 with Section 39, Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936 with Section 67, Right to Property

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Compensation for Land Acquisition Delay: Loonkaran Gandhi vs. State of Maharashtra (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of compensation for land acquired under the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1936, with significant delays. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition, Civil Law Case Name: Loonkaran Gandhi (D) Thr. Lr. vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Compensation for Land Acquisition Delay: Loonkaran Gandhi vs. State of Maharashtra (2023) Read Post »

Temporary Land Acquisition: Supreme Court Limits Duration in Manubhai Bharwad vs. ONGC (20 January 2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 300A, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 35, M.M. Sundresh, M.R. Shah, Right to Property, Temporary Land Acquisition

Supreme Court on Temporary Land Acquisition: Manubhai Bharwad vs. ONGC (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Can temporary land acquisition continue indefinitely, infringing on property rights? CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Manubhai Sendhabhai Bharwad and Another vs. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. & Others Judgment Date: 20 January 2023 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 20 January

Temporary Land Acquisition: Supreme Court Limits Duration in Manubhai Bharwad vs. ONGC (20 January 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies rules on withholding pension and gratuity during pending criminal cases: Dr. Hira Lal vs. State of Bihar (2020)

/ Bihar Pension Rules, 1950, Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 with Rule 27, Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 with Rule 43, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 300A, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Right to Property, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court on Withholding Pension and Gratuity Pending Criminal Proceedings: Dr. Hira Lal vs. State of Bihar (2020) Date of the Judgment: February 18, 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 137 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Indu Malhotra, J. Can a state government withhold the pension and gratuity of a retired employee because of pending criminal

Supreme Court clarifies rules on withholding pension and gratuity during pending criminal cases: Dr. Hira Lal vs. State of Bihar (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Property: Vidya Devi vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2020)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Compensation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 300A, Fundamental Rights, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Land Acquisition, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Right to Property

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Property: Vidya Devi vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the State can dispossess a citizen of their property without due process of law and payment of compensation. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition/Constitutional Law Case Name: Vidya Devi vs. The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. Judgment Date: January

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Property: Vidya Devi vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Landowners in Noida Land Acquisition Case

/ A.K. Sikri, Constitutional Law, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4(1), Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 5A, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6(1), M.R. Shah, Right to Property, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Landowners in Noida Land Acquisition Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether landowners are entitled to compensation when their land was acquired without proper procedure and construction was carried out on it. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: New Okhla Industrial Development Authority vs. Lt. Col. J.B. Kuchhal (Dead) Through Lrs. And Ors.

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Landowners in Noida Land Acquisition Case Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Compensation: Mohammad Yusuf vs. State of Haryana (2018)

/ Compensation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 300A, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 23, Market Value, R.K. Agrawal, Right to Property, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court Upholds Land Compensation: Mohammad Yusuf vs. State of Haryana (2018) Date of the Judgment: April 16, 2018 Citation: 2018 INSC 337 Judges: R.K. Agrawal, J and S. Abdul Nazeer, J. Can the government acquire land for public purposes without providing adequate compensation to the landowners? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this

Supreme Court Upholds Land Compensation: Mohammad Yusuf vs. State of Haryana (2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top