Search Results for "land exchange"

787 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 787 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition of Encroacher Seeking Land Exchange. Encroacher Cannot Claim Exchange of Land as an Absolute Right; Government Land Encroachment Must Be Evicted Following Due Process.

The petitioner, Mariammal, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 15.08.2024 passed by the Thasildar (3rd respondent) rejecting her claim fo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Karnataka Land Reforms Case — Testamentary Succession of Tenancy Rights Upheld. Civil Court Findings on Tenancy and Succession Are Binding on Land Tribunal Under Section 48-A of the Karnataka Land Reforms Act, 1961.

The case involves a long-standing dispute over agricultural land in Bilagi Village, Karnataka, spanning over half a century. The appellant, Kanna Timm...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Partially Allows Challenge to SAFEMA Forfeiture Order — Agricultural Land Acquired Prior to Detention Exempt from Forfeiture. Property acquired before the 'illegal' period under Section 2(2)(b) of SAFEMA cannot be forfeited; appellate authority's order partly confirmed.

The petitioner, Ranchhodbhai Bhagwanbhai Tandel (since deceased, through his legal heir Naresh Ranchhodbhai Tandel), filed a criminal writ petition un...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Land Allotment to Private Company in Title Dispute. Court holds that disputed questions of title cannot be adjudicated in PIL jurisdiction and that the petitioners failed to establish that the land was government property.

The case is a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by two petitioners, Mr. Chetan Kamble and Mr. Vilas V. Devrukhkar, against the State of Maharasht...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition and Second Appeal in Land Revenue Dispute — Upholds Concurrent Findings on Mutation Entry Validity. The court held that mutation entries do not confer title and that the Civil Court's decree regarding possession was binding on revenue authorities.

The case involves a land dispute between the petitioners (legal heirs of Dattu Appa Patil) and respondent 3 (Rama Yesaba Patil) over mutation entries ...