Land Acquisition Act, 1894

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Delhi Administration vs. Pawan Kumar (2022)

/ Hemant Gupta, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 31(1), Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with Section 24(2), V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Delhi Administration vs. Pawan Kumar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a subsequent purchaser of land can claim lapse of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and whether deposit of compensation in court amounts to payment. CASE […]

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Delhi Administration vs. Pawan Kumar (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition Compensation: Bhag Singh vs. Union of India (2022)

/ Hemant Gupta, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition Compensation: Bhag Singh vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair market value for land acquisition. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition. Case Name: Bhag Singh vs. Union of India. [Judgment Date]: May 5, 2022 Date of the Judgment: May 5, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 428 Judges: Hemant Gupta, J.,

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition Compensation: Bhag Singh vs. Union of India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Insolvency Case: Vishal Vijay Kalantri vs. Shailen Shah (2022) INSC 429

/ Ajay Rastogi, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 62, Judges, Review Jurisdiction, Review Petition, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Insolvency Case: Vishal Vijay Kalantri vs. Shailen Shah (2022) INSC 429 Date of the Judgment: May 04, 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 429 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Ajay Rastogi, J. Can a review petition be entertained if it does not present any new grounds for reconsideration? The Supreme

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition in Insolvency Case: Vishal Vijay Kalantri vs. Shailen Shah (2022) INSC 429 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Compensation for Land Used in Road Construction: Kalyani vs. Sulthan Bathery Municipality (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 300A, Dinesh Maheshwari, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Land Acquisition, Land Rights, Property Law, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Compensation for Land Used in Road Construction: Kalyani vs. Sulthan Bathery Municipality (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a landowner is entitled to compensation when their land is used for public road construction without formal acquisition. CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Property Rights. Case Name: Kalyani (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors. vs. The

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Compensation for Land Used in Road Construction: Kalyani vs. Sulthan Bathery Municipality (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles land acquisition dispute: Delhi Development Authority vs. Bhim Sain Goel (2022)

/ Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Law, National Highways Act, 1956, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with Section 24(2)

Supreme Court settles land acquisition dispute: Delhi Development Authority vs. Bhim Sain Goel (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a land acquisition proceeding lapses under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, if the acquiring authority was prevented from taking possession due to court orders obtained

Supreme Court settles land acquisition dispute: Delhi Development Authority vs. Bhim Sain Goel (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Land Compensation: Ram Chander vs. Union of India (20 April 2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Compensation, Judges, Judicial Review, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4, M. R. Shah, Review of Judgments

Supreme Court Restores Land Compensation: Ram Chander vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in reviewing its earlier judgment based on a subsequently overruled precedent, when the overruled precedent was later restored on remand. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Sh. Ram Chander (Dead) Thr Lrs vs. Union of

Supreme Court Restores Land Compensation: Ram Chander vs. Union of India (20 April 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Withdrawal of Land Acquisition: U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad vs. Ram Singh (2022)

/ Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 17(1), Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 48, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 9, U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965, U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 with Section 28, U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 with Section 32

Supreme Court Upholds Withdrawal of Land Acquisition: U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad vs. Ram Singh (2022) Date of the Judgment: April 20, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 408 Judges: K.M. Joseph, J. and Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a government authority withdraw from acquiring land after initiating the acquisition process? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed

Supreme Court Upholds Withdrawal of Land Acquisition: U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad vs. Ram Singh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court enhances compensation for land acquisition in Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation case (19 April 2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, M.R. Shah, Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961, Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 with Section 32(2), Maharashtra Industrial Development Act, 1961 with Section 34

Supreme Court enhances compensation for land acquisition in Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation case Date of the Judgment: 19 April 2022 Citation: [Not Available in the provided text] Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and B.V. Nagarathna, J. When land is acquired for industrial development, how should the compensation be calculated? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed

Supreme Court enhances compensation for land acquisition in Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation case (19 April 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Rules on Land Acquisition and Compensation: Sukh Dutt Ratra vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 300-A, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Land Acquisition, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition with Section 4, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, S. Ravindra Bhat

Supreme Court Rules on Land Acquisition and Compensation: Sukh Dutt Ratra vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the State can evade its responsibility to compensate landowners for land acquired without due process, citing delay and laches. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition, Constitutional Law. Case Name: Sukh Dutt Ratra & Anr. vs. State of

Supreme Court Rules on Land Acquisition and Compensation: Sukh Dutt Ratra vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Modifies Land Compensation: Union of India vs. Premlata (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Modifies Land Compensation: Union of India vs. Premlata (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair compensation for land acquisition, specifically regarding the deduction for development charges. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Union of India vs. Premlata and Others Judgment Date: 06 April 2022 Date of the Judgment: 06 April 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC

Supreme Court Modifies Land Compensation: Union of India vs. Premlata (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case: APMC vs. State of Karnataka (22 March 2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 17(4), Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4(1), Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, M.R. Shah, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with Section 24(2)

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case: APMC vs. State of Karnataka (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether land acquisitions had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: The Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee Bangalore vs. The State of Karnataka

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case: APMC vs. State of Karnataka (22 March 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Aside Cryptic Review Order in Service Matter: Ratan Lal Patel vs. Dr. Hari Singh Gour Vishwavidyalaya (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Civil Procedure, Judges, M.R. Shah, Review Jurisdiction, Review of Judgments, Service Law

Supreme Court Sets Aside Cryptic Review Order in Service Matter: Ratan Lal Patel vs. Dr. Hari Singh Gour Vishwavidyalaya (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can allow a review petition without specifying the error apparent on the face of the record. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Ratan Lal Patel vs. Dr. Hari Singh

Supreme Court Sets Aside Cryptic Review Order in Service Matter: Ratan Lal Patel vs. Dr. Hari Singh Gour Vishwavidyalaya (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top