Search Results for "land acquisition lapse"

616 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 616 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Considers Compensation Enhancement for Acquired Land in Malad. Reference Under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Seeks Higher Compensation Than Awarded by SLAO.

These proceedings arose from the acquisition of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquired property comprised land bearing Survey No. 91 ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Petition for Rental Compensation in Land Acquisition Case. Petitioner entitled to rental compensation from date of possession till award under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for land taken for octroi post.

The petitioner, M/s. Devi Construction LLP, owned lands in survey Nos.10 (part), 11 (part) and 160 (part) of Village Wakad, Taluka Mulshi, Dist. Pune,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Refers Writ Petition to Larger Bench Due to Conflict on MRTP Act Reservation Lapsing. Dispute Involves Whether Notice Under Section 127 Served Before Plan Revision Lapses Upon Finalisation of Revised Development Plan Under Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966.

The judgment pertains to a writ petition filed by an agriculturist challenging the reservation of his land for a primary school under the Maharashtra ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Land Acquisition for Resettlement Project Due to Unexplained Delay of 12 Years. Petitioners' challenge to 2006 order of Divisional Commissioner fails as they failed to demonstrate diligence after personal hearing in 2005.

The petitioners, four individuals who are grandchildren of the original landowner Babasaheb Khadirsaheb Pirjade, filed a writ petition in 2018 challen...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Land Acquisition Case Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Notifications invoking urgency under Section 17(4) and dispensing with inquiry under Section 5A upheld as land was necessary for residential colony scheme and decision based on subjective satisfaction of authority.

The dispute arose from land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, initiated by the State of Uttar Pradesh and the Bulandshhar ...