Land Law

Land Allotment Authority Dispute: Supreme Court Remands Case of Rajaram Abasaheb Deshmukh vs. State of Maharashtra (4 November 2022)

/ Civil Procedure, Judges, Judicial Review, Jurisdiction of Authorities, Land Allotment, Land Law, M.M. Sundresh, M.R. Shah, Powers of High Court, Rehabilitation Schemes, Remand of Cases

Supreme Court Remands Land Allotment Dispute: Rajaram Abasaheb Deshmukh vs. State of Maharashtra (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Authority of Deputy Collector to allot land under rehabilitation scheme CASE TYPE: Land Allotment Dispute Case Name: Rajaram Abasaheb Deshmukh vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. Judgment Date: 4 November 2022 Date of the Judgment: 4 November 2022 Citation: […]

Land Allotment Authority Dispute: Supreme Court Remands Case of Rajaram Abasaheb Deshmukh vs. State of Maharashtra (4 November 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Directs Payment of Dues for Land Allotment: Union of India vs. Buddha Tri-Ratna Mission (2022)

/ Contract Law, Judges, Land Allotment, Land Law, Payment of Dues, S. Ravindra Bhat, Sudhanshu Dhulia, Terms of Allotment, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Directs Payment of Dues for Land Allotment: Union of India vs. Buddha Tri-Ratna Mission (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the respondent should be given possession of land without paying the full outstanding dues, including interest, as per the original allotment terms. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Union of India & Anr. vs. Buddha Tri-Ratna

Supreme Court Directs Payment of Dues for Land Allotment: Union of India vs. Buddha Tri-Ratna Mission (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Restoration of Forfeited Land: State of Karnataka vs. G. Ramanarayana Joshi (2022)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Judges, Karnataka Land Revenue Rules, 1966, L. Nageswara Rao, Land Law, Land Revenue, Restoration of Forfeited Land

Supreme Court Upholds Restoration of Forfeited Land: State of Karnataka vs. G. Ramanarayana Joshi (2022) Date of the Judgment: May 17, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 468 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., A.S. Bopanna, J. Can a forfeited land be restored to its original owner even after it has been transferred to the Forest Department? The

Supreme Court Upholds Restoration of Forfeited Land: State of Karnataka vs. G. Ramanarayana Joshi (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Tenant’s Obligations During Eviction Appeals under Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act: Heera Traders vs. Kamla Jain (22 February 2022)

/ Judges, K.M. Joseph, Land Law, Landlord Rights, Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961, Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 with Section 13, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Rent Law, Supreme Court Judgments, Tenant Rights

Supreme Court Clarifies Tenant’s Obligations During Eviction Appeals under Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act Date of the Judgment: 22 February 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 166 Judges: K.M. Joseph, J., Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. Can a tenant, who has been ordered to be evicted, be required to pay market rent during the pendency of their appeal,

Supreme Court Clarifies Tenant’s Obligations During Eviction Appeals under Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act: Heera Traders vs. Kamla Jain (22 February 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Land Dispute Case for Detailed Review: Sulochanabai Swaropchand Chawre vs. The Additional Commissioner, Amravati

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Easement Rights, Judges, Land Law, Order 41, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Property Disputes, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Remands Land Dispute Case for Detailed Review: Sulochanabai Swaropchand Chawre vs. The Additional Commissioner, Amravati LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can dismiss a writ petition challenging an order directing the creation of a road through private land without considering essential issues such as easement rights. CASE TYPE: Civil Dispute, Land Law Case

Supreme Court Remands Land Dispute Case for Detailed Review: Sulochanabai Swaropchand Chawre vs. The Additional Commissioner, Amravati Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Compensation for Landowners Dispossessed Under Kerala Forest Act: The Conservator and Custodian of Forest & Ors. vs. Sobha John Koshy & Anr. (2021)

/ Ashok Bhushan, Compensation, Judges, Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003, Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003 with Section 3, Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003 with Section 8, Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971, Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 with Section 8, Land Law, M.R. Shah, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court Orders Compensation for Landowners Dispossessed Under Kerala Forest Act: The Conservator and Custodian of Forest & Ors. vs. Sobha John Koshy & Anr. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Compensation for land not restored to owners after being declared not vested under the Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971. CASE TYPE: Land Law/Forest Law

Supreme Court Orders Compensation for Landowners Dispossessed Under Kerala Forest Act: The Conservator and Custodian of Forest & Ors. vs. Sobha John Koshy & Anr. (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Panchayat Land Regularization for Encroachments Exceeding 200 Square Yards

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Encroachment, Judges, Land Law, M.R. Shah, Panchayat Land, Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964, Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964 with Rule 12(4), Regularization

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Panchayat Land Regularization for Encroachments Exceeding 200 Square Yards LEGAL ISSUE: Whether unauthorized occupation of Panchayat land exceeding 200 square yards can be regularized under Rule 12(4) of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Rules, 1964. CASE TYPE: Land Law, Panchayat Land Regularization. Case Name: Joginder and another vs. State

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Panchayat Land Regularization for Encroachments Exceeding 200 Square Yards Read Post »

Supreme Court Vacates Status Quo Order in Land Dispute: Hanumappa vs. State of Karnataka (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Civil Procedure, Interim Orders, Judges, Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961, Land Law, S. A. Bobde, Special Leave Petition, Tenancy Disputes, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Vacates Status Quo Order in Land Dispute: Hanumappa vs. State of Karnataka (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a status quo order should continue in a land dispute where a tenant’s claim is contested and the land’s nature has changed. CASE TYPE: Land Dispute/Tenancy Case Name: Hanumappa (Since Deceased) by His Lrs. & Ors. vs.

Supreme Court Vacates Status Quo Order in Land Dispute: Hanumappa vs. State of Karnataka (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies definition of ‘Shamilat Deh’ land under Punjab Village Common Lands Act: Patram vs. Gram Panchayat Katwar (2020)

/ Deepak Gupta, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Land Law, Land Law with Section 2(g), Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, Shamilat Deh Land

Supreme Court Clarifies Shamilat Deh Land Definition in Haryana: Patram vs. Gram Panchayat Katwar (2020) Date of the Judgment: March 4, 2020 Citation: 2020 INSC 217 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J. and Deepak Gupta, J. Can land traditionally held by a family within a village, but not used for common village purposes, be classified as

Supreme Court clarifies definition of ‘Shamilat Deh’ land under Punjab Village Common Lands Act: Patram vs. Gram Panchayat Katwar (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Restrictions on Land Transfers by Scheduled Tribes: Additional Commissioner Revenue vs. Akhalaq Hussain (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Judges, Land Law, Land Transfer, R. Banumathi, S. Abdul Nazeer, Scheduled Tribes Land Rights, U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 with Section 157-B, U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 with Section 161, U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 with Section 166

Supreme Court Upholds Restrictions on Land Transfers by Scheduled Tribes: Additional Commissioner Revenue vs. Akhalaq Hussain (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an exchange of land by a member of a Scheduled Tribe to a non-Scheduled Tribe member is valid under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950. CASE TYPE: Land Law Case Name: Additional

Supreme Court Upholds Restrictions on Land Transfers by Scheduled Tribes: Additional Commissioner Revenue vs. Akhalaq Hussain (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Land Dispute Case: Pre-Partition Tenants’ Rights to be Decided: Indu Bai vs. State of Telangana (21 January 2020)

/ Hemant Gupta, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Land Dispute, Land Law, Pre-Partition Tenancy Rights, State Government Land

Supreme Court Remands Land Dispute Case: Pre-Partition Tenants’ Rights to be Decided: Indu Bai vs. State of Telangana (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether pre-partition tenants have a right to continue in possession of land transferred to the State Government. CASE TYPE: Land Dispute, Property Law Case Name: Indu Bai & Ors. vs. State of Telangana &

Supreme Court Remands Land Dispute Case: Pre-Partition Tenants’ Rights to be Decided: Indu Bai vs. State of Telangana (21 January 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Reverses High Court Order on Land Conversion Fees: State of Odisha vs. Bichitrananda Das (2019)

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Encroachment, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Land Conversion, Land Law, Leasehold to Freehold, Orissa Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act 1972, Orissa Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act 1972 with Section 4(1)

Supreme Court Reverses High Court Order on Land Conversion Fees: State of Odisha vs. Bichitrananda Das (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether conversion fees for leasehold to freehold land should be calculated based on the date of application or the date of the final decision when there is an issue of encroachment. CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Land

Supreme Court Reverses High Court Order on Land Conversion Fees: State of Odisha vs. Bichitrananda Das (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top