Search Results for "Babua Ram"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Developer's Challenge to Deemed Conveyance in Favor ...
Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Arbitration Act Case — Upholds Appointment ...
Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction of Appellant for Murder Under Section 302 I...
High Court of Bombay Quashes Deputy Registrar's Directives in Co-operative Socie...

Search Results for "Babua Ram"

10 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 10 result(s)

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Allows Landowners' Appeal in Land Acquisition Compensation Case for Re-determination Under Section 28-A. The Court held that Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, being a beneficial provision, permits re-determination of compensation based on appellate court awards to ensure equality among similarly placed landowners, overriding a strict interpretation of the definition of 'Court' under Section 3(d).

25 Mar 2026

The dispute arose from land acquisition proceedings for the Hubballi-Ankola Broad Gauge Line, where the appellants, landowners, lost their land and we...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Partially Allows NOIDA's Appeals and Dismisses Landowners' Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Dispute — Compensation Enhanced to INR 340 per sq. yd. Based on Prior High Court Determination. The Court held that the compensation rate of INR 340 per sq. yd. determined by the High Court in earlier proceedings had attained finality and should be applied uniformly, setting aside the High Court's enhancement to INR 449 per sq. yd. in NOIDA's appeals.

15 Mar 2022

The case involves appeals by the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) and landowners against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court da...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses SLP of Landowner Seeking Enhanced Compensation Under Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Collector's Order Not Vitiated as Petitioner Failed to Inform About Pending Appeals and Did Not Seek Reference Under Section 28A(3). The Court held that the principle in Babua Ram v. State of U.P. requiring the Collector to await final appellate decree applies only when the Collector is aware of pending appeals; here, the Collector acted in good faith.

26 Feb 2019

The case involves a challenge by M/s. Model Economic Township Ltd. (petitioner) against the dismissal of its writ petition by the Punjab and Haryana H...

High Court

Bombay High Court Acquits Five Accused in Murder Case Due to Unreliable Testimony of Related Witnesses and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC set aside as sole eyewitness was brother of deceased and evidence suffered from material contradictions and improvements.

7 Dec 2015

The case involves four criminal appeals filed by five accused persons convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Land Acquisition Compensation Redetermination Petition for Delay and Lack of Jurisdiction Under Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Petitioners' application under Section 28A rejected as they failed to file within prescribed period and did not obtain reference under Section 18.

24 Feb 2014

The petitioners, three agriculturists, challenged an order dated 30.6.2011 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, Nanded, rejecting their application...

High Court

Bombay High Court Directs Disposal of Section 28A Applications Despite Pending Appeals in Land Acquisition Case. Landowners' Applications for Redetermination of Compensation Cannot Be Kept Pending Solely Due to Pendency of State's Appeals Against Reference Court Award.

7 Feb 2014

The petitioners were owners of lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. An award under Section 11 was made in 1988. In 1999, they filed ap...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Challenge to Section 28A Limitation in Land Acquisition Act — Three-Month Period for Redetermination of Compensation Held Constitutional. The court ruled that the three-month limitation under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is reasonable and does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution, as the classification between award acceptors and Section 18 reference seekers is valid.

24 Jul 2012

The petitioner, Surendrakumar Madhusudan Mor, owned land bearing Gat No.128 admeasuring 5.27 hectares at mouza Pimpri (Hatgaon), Taluka and District Y...

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses State Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Re-determination Under Section 28A of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Claimants Entitled to Enhanced Compensation Based on Reference Court Award in Similar Lands.

17 Mar 2006

The State of Maharashtra filed two appeals under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenging the judgments and awards of the Reference C...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Land Acquisition Compensation Enhancement Petitions for Agricultural Land in Nagpur — Held That Market Value Must Be Determined Under Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Based on Potential Use and Comparable Sales. The court directed reassessment of compensation considering industrial potential and comparable sales.

30 Nov -0001

The judgment pertains to a batch of writ petitions filed by landowners from Takalghat, Hingna, Nagpur, challenging the compensation awarded by the Spe...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Cases — Enhances Compensation for Claimants Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Court holds that market value must be determined based on potential use and comparable sales, and that claimants are entitled to additional benefits under Section 23(1A) and 23(2) of the Act.

30 Nov -0001

The case involves multiple first appeals filed by claimants whose lands were acquired by the State of Maharashtra for the Metro Centre No.1, Panvel, u...

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)