Search Results for "surplus land determination"

169 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 169 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Refund of Premium Paid Under ULC Act Government Resolution — Petitioner Cannot Claim Refund After Voluntarily Availing Benefit and Selling Land to Third Parties.

The petitioner, Sudarshan Chemical Industries Ltd., was a beneficiary of an exemption order dated 29 February 1980 under Section 20(1) of the Urban La...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeals in Urban Land Ceiling Case — Possession Not Validly Taken Under Section 10(6) of ULC Act, 1976. Act of Court Should Not Injure Suitor; Repeal of ULC Act in 2008 Vests Land in Appellant.

The appellant, M/S A.P. Electrical Equipment Corporation (now ECE Industries Limited), owned land in Fatehnagar Village, Rangareddy District, Telangan...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeals Against Single Judge's Remand Order in Ceiling Surplus Land Cases. Transfers of Land After SLDT Order Held Non-Est, Rule 4 of Maharashtra Agriculture Lands Rules Inapplicable.

The appeals arose from a dispute concerning the determination of surplus agricultural land under the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdin...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Ex-Serviceman's Petition Against Cancellation of Surplus Land Allotment - Violation of Natural Justice and Limitation. The court set aside the cancellation order passed after 8 years without notice, restoring the allotment of three acres of surplus land to the petitioner.

The petitioner, an ex-serviceman, was allotted three acres of surplus land out of Gut No. 19A at village Sangvi (Karadkhed) in Degloor Tahsil in the y...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals in Land Dispute Involving Surplus Land and Tenancy Rights. Court upholds Single Judge's order confirming that land was not surplus and appellants were not entitled to restoration of possession under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code and Bombay Tenancy Act.

The case involves three Letters Patent Appeals arising out of writ petitions decided by a Single Judge of the Bombay High Court at Nagpur. The appella...