Land Acquisition Act, 1894

Supreme Court Clarifies Remedy for Non-Award of Interest in Land Acquisition Cases: Union of India vs. Pushpavathi (2018) INSC 113

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 28A, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 34, R.K. Agrawal, Remedies, Writ Petition

Supreme Court Clarifies Remedy for Non-Award of Interest in Land Acquisition Cases Date of the Judgment: February 06, 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 113 Judges: R.K. Agrawal, J., Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. (authored the judgment) Can a landowner, aggrieved by the Collector’s failure to award interest on compensation in land acquisition cases, directly approach the Civil […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Remedy for Non-Award of Interest in Land Acquisition Cases: Union of India vs. Pushpavathi (2018) INSC 113 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies land acquisition timelines under Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act: Chhabildas vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) INSC 96 (6 February 2018)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Land Acquisition, Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966, Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 127, Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 49, Navin Sinha, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Land Acquisition Timelines under Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act Date of the Judgment: 6 February 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 96 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J. and Navin Sinha, J. Can a land owner be indefinitely deprived of using their land if the government delays acquisition? The Supreme Court addressed this crucial question regarding

Supreme Court clarifies land acquisition timelines under Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act: Chhabildas vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) INSC 96 (6 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the requirements for a valid reference application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act: Shahid Jamal vs. State of U.P. (30 January 2018)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Land Acquisition Reference Applications: Shahid Jamal vs. State of U.P. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: What constitutes a valid application for reference to the court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, specifically regarding the timing and content of such applications? CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Shahid Jamal &

Supreme Court clarifies the requirements for a valid reference application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act: Shahid Jamal vs. State of U.P. (30 January 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Shivangouda Ninganagouda Keri vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (29 January 2018)

/ Compensation, Equal Compensation, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Acquisition, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Shivangouda Ninganagouda Keri vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair land value in land acquisition cases. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition. Case Name: Shivangouda Ninganagouda Keri (Since Deceased) by His Lrs. vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, UKP, Bilagi District Bagalkot. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Shivangouda Ninganagouda Keri vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (29 January 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case for Fresh Determination of Compensation: Surender Singh vs. State of Haryana (2018) INSC 25

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Court Fees Act, Court Fees Act with Section 13, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 23, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, R.K. Agrawal

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case for Fresh Determination of Compensation Date of the Judgment: January 25, 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 25 Judges: R.K. Agrawal, J., Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. When land is acquired for public purposes, how should the compensation be determined? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this crucial question in a

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case for Fresh Determination of Compensation: Surender Singh vs. State of Haryana (2018) INSC 25 Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation: Maya Devi vs. State of Haryana (2018)

/ Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 23(1), Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4(1), R. Banumathi, Ranjan Gogoi

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation: Maya Devi vs. State of Haryana (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair market value for land acquisition. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Maya Devi (D) Through LRs & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Anr. Judgment Date: 25 January 2018 Date of the Judgment: 25 January 2018 Citation: (2018)

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation: Maya Devi vs. State of Haryana (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court disposes of land acquisition compensation appeals: Nachhatar Singh vs. State of Punjab (2018)

/ Appeals, Civil Law, Compensation, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Acquisition, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court disposes of land acquisition compensation appeals: Nachhatar Singh vs. State of Punjab (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Land acquisition compensation. CASE TYPE: Civil. Case Name: Nachhatar Singh Etc. Etc. vs. The State of Punjab & Ors. [Judgment Date]: January 22, 2018 Date of the Judgment: January 22, 2018 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Kurian

Supreme Court disposes of land acquisition compensation appeals: Nachhatar Singh vs. State of Punjab (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Land Compensation Case for Re-evaluation of Fruit Tree Valuation: State of Punjab vs. Thuru Ram (2018)

/ Arun Mishra, Compensation, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Remands Land Compensation Case: State of Punjab vs. Thuru Ram (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Valuation of fruit trees on acquired land. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition. Case Name: State of Punjab and Ors. vs. Thuru Ram. [Judgment Date]: January 19, 2018 Date of the Judgment: January 19, 2018. Citation: Not Available. Judges: Arun Mishra, J.

Supreme Court Remands Land Compensation Case for Re-evaluation of Fruit Tree Valuation: State of Punjab vs. Thuru Ram (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies procedure for re-determination of land acquisition compensation under Section 28A when the initial award is under appeal: Bharatsingh vs. State of Maharashtra (2017)

/ Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 28A, R. Banumathi

Date of the Judgment: 12 December 2017 Citation: (2017) INSC 1062 Judges: Kurian Joseph, J., R. Banumathi, J. What happens when a landowner applies for increased compensation under Section 28A of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but the court’s award that they are relying on is being appealed? The Supreme Court addressed this issue, clarifying

Supreme Court clarifies procedure for re-determination of land acquisition compensation under Section 28A when the initial award is under appeal: Bharatsingh vs. State of Maharashtra (2017) Read Post »

Land Acquisition Lapse under the 2013 Act: Supreme Court Refers Issue to Larger Bench in Indore Development Authority vs. Shailendra (2017)

/ Amitava Roy, Arun Mishra, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 12, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 31, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 34, 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

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether land acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, if compensation is not deposited in court but with the Land Acquisition Collector. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Indore Development Authority vs. Shailendra (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors.

Land Acquisition Lapse under the 2013 Act: Supreme Court Refers Issue to Larger Bench in Indore Development Authority vs. Shailendra (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Finality to Land Acquisition: H.N. Jagannath vs. State of Karnataka (2017)

/ Arun Mishra, Bangalore Development Authority Act, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 9, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Judges, Land Acquisition, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 16(2), Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a civil court can decide on the validity of land acquisition notifications and proceedings. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: H. N. Jagannath & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. Judgment Date: 06 December 2017 Date of the Judgment: 06 December 2017 Citation: 2017 INSC 1049 Judges: Arun Mishra, J., Mohan

Supreme Court Restores Finality to Land Acquisition: H.N. Jagannath vs. State of Karnataka (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Protects Landowners from Unfair Compensation in Delayed Land Acquisition: Mitesh Kumar Ramanbhai Patel & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. (2017)

/ Arun Mishra, Consent Awards, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Date of the Judgment: November 16, 2017 Citation: Mitesh Kumar Ramanbhai Patel & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat & Ors., Civil Appeal No(s). 19501-19503 of 2017 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 21067-21069 of 2014) Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar. Can the government use consent forms obtained years

Supreme Court Protects Landowners from Unfair Compensation in Delayed Land Acquisition: Mitesh Kumar Ramanbhai Patel & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. (2017) Read Post »

Scroll to Top