Search Results for "eminent domain"

254 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 254 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Hears Challenge to Constitutional Validity of Rule 13.3.1.5 of Pune Development Control Rules Allowing Municipal Takeover of Private Open Spaces for ₹1 Compensation. Petitioners Claim Violation of Right to Property under Article 300A and Lack of Statutory Basis in BPMC Act.

Five writ petitions were filed before the Bombay High Court challenging the constitutional validity of Rule 13.3.1.5 of the Development Control Rules ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Quo-Warranto Petitions Challenging KPSC Appointments, Upholds Executive Power Under Article 316. Court Rules That Article 316 is a Complete Code and No Rules are Required for Appointing Chairman and Members of the State Public Service Commission.

Two public interest litigations were filed by Shashi Prasad Gandhi and T. Narasimhamurthy challenging the appointments of the Chairman and members of ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Permits Landowners to Alienate Property Notified for Acquisition Under Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act Due to Medical Emergency. Right to Life Under Article 21 of Constitution Overrides Procedural Restrictions When Property is Sole Source of Livelihood.

The petitioners, owners of land in Sy.No.207, Hulikunte Village, Doddaballapura Taluk, filed a writ petition seeking release of at least 50% ad interi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Dharwad Bench Hears Revenue Appeal Against ITAT Order Deleting Penalty Under Section 271(1)(c) for Assessment Year 2006-07 Due to Defective Notice; Questions Validity of Penalty Initiation Despite Retrospective Amendment to Section 271(1B)

The appeal before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, arose from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru, which had allowed ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Disposes of Multiple Writ Petitions on Land Acquisition Lapse. Petitioners contend that acquisition proceedings lapsed under Section 11A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Sections 24, 25 of the 2013 Act due to non-making of award within prescribed period.

These writ petitions were filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging land acquisition proceedings. The petitioners, who...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Examines Whether Minister Can Drop Land Acquisition After Award and Dismissal of Landowner’s Challenge. Matter Concerns Section 48 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and Power of Acquiring Authority to Object.

The petitioner, City & Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO), acting as the New Town's Development Authority under the Maharashtra Regional & Tow...