Search Results for "Survey and boundary marking"

10 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 10 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Quashes Eviction Order Against Ashram in Land Encroachment Case — Proceedings Vitiated for Violation of Natural Justice. City Mamlatdar's Order Under Section 61 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 Set Aside as Show-Cause Notice Not Served and No Opportunity of Hearing Given.

The petitioner, Sant Shri Asharam Ashram through its authorized signatory Rajeshkumar Shadilal Bharti, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Santiniketan Construction Case - Appellants Wins Against Demolition Order - High Court's Direction for Demolition and Compensation Set Aside

The Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by Appellants challenging the High Court's order directing demolition of their building in Santiniketan ar...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

“Mandatory Injunction vs Possession: Supreme Court Clarifies Section 41(h) Specific Relief Act (2026 INSC 61)”“Cloud on Title & Possession: Why Injunction Suit Fails

In Sanjay Paliwal v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., the plaintiffs sought a mandatory injunction to remove a wall allegedly blocking access to their l...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Directs Revenue Authorities to Fix Four Boundary Stones for Senior Citizen’s Property to Construct Toilet, Clarifying No Dispossession of Objector. Orders Issued Under Article 226 of Constitution of India After Survey Was Already Conducted.

The dispute arose from the petitioner's inability to construct a toilet on her property due to objections from the fifth respondent and the failure of...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Disposes of Writ Petition Directing Survey and Boundary Marking for Toilet Construction. Court Ensures No Dispossession Under Guise of Survey, Permits Recourse to Law for Recovery if Possession is with Fifth Respondent.

The petitioner, a 90-year-old lady, owned a property forming part of Door No.4/25, comprised in S.No.1021/22, Vadakukaraseri Village, Srivaikundam Tal...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal for Enhanced Compensation in Land Acquisition Case — Blue Zone Classification Not Proved by State. Market Value Determined at Rs. 100 per sq. ft. Based on Comparable Awards for Similar Lands Acquired for Same Purpose Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

The case pertains to the acquisition of land owned by the appellant, Kazi Akiloddin, for the construction of a flood protection wall in Akola, Maharas...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Land Acquisition for Road Widening in Pune. Acquisition under Section 126 of MRTP Act for public purpose is valid and petitioner cannot claim title over land reserved for road.

The petitioner, Atur Park-4 Co-operative Housing Society Limited, filed a writ petition challenging the acquisition of its land for road widening in P...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows State Appeal in Land Acquisition Case — Possession Held Validly Taken Despite Existence of Structures. Panchnama and Rapat Sufficient to Constitute Taking of Possession Under Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

The State of Haryana appealed against the High Court's judgment that declared the acquisition of the respondent's land as lapsed under Section 24(2) o...