Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the land acquisition punjab amendment act 1969 Page 1 of about 3,381 results (0.139 seconds)

Sep 11 1991 (SC)

Bhatinda Improvement Trust Vs. Balwant Singh and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1992SC2214; JT1991(6)SC135; (1992)101PLR181; 1991(2)SCALE557; (1991)4SCC368; [1991]3SCR928; 1991(2)LC643(SC)

..... that some of the provisions of the land acquisition act, as referred to in the relevant sections of the said act, are given effect to as amended by the relevant sections of the said act. in these circumstances, it cannot be held that any provisions of the land acquisition act have been incorporated into the said act and the provisions of the land acquisition act which have to be applied, are the ..... and mahindra ltd. v. union of india and anr. : [1979]2scr1038 . in that case it has been pointed out that section 55 of the monopolies and restrictive trade practices act, 1969 (referred to hereinafter as the 'mrtp act') provides that any person aggrieved by the order made by the central government or the commission (the monopolies and restrictive trade practices commission) under ..... years from the first publication of the notice under section 36 and on that account it was bad in law. this contention found favour with the learned single judge of punjab and haryana high court who allowed the writ petition and set aside the notification under section 42 which was issued on june 30, 1980. a letters patent appeal preferred ..... h. kania, j.1. leave granted. counsel heard.2. the appellant, bhatinda improvement trust, framed a development scheme under the punjab town improvement act, 1922 (referred to hereinafter as 'the said act'). notices under section 36 of the said act in respect of the said scheme, setting out the particulars referred to in the said section, were published in the daily tribune on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 12 1993 (SC)

Gauri Shankar Gaur and Others, Etc. Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1994SC169; 1993(3)SCALE371; (1994)1SCC92; [1993]Supp1SCR667

..... with special leave petition in which following order was passed:leave granted limited to the question as to whether the limitation provided in proviso to section 6 of the land acquisition act introduced by the amending act of 1967 is also applicable in the facts of this case in view of u.p. avas & vikas adhiniyam.from the order granting leave extracted above it is ..... the land acquisition act except sub-section (1) of section 4, section 5 and sub-section (2) of section 17 are bodily incorporated in the bombay act. those provisions are deemed to be part and parcel of the bombay act in terms of appendix i20. in mahendra & mahendra ltd. v. union of india and anr. [1919] 2 scr 1038, the monopolies & restrictive trade practices act, 1969 ..... it was held that it is only by reference. in bhatinda improvement trust's case section 59(b) of the punjab town improvement act, 1992 provided that the land acquisition act may be subject to further modification us indicated in the schedule to the said act. schedule ii (clause 1) provided the procedure for publication of the notification under section 36 as provided under sub-section ..... by section 55 thereof incorporated the grounds specified in section 100 of the c.p.c., 1907 as its part to file second appeal against the order made by the commission. it was contended that section 100 as amended in f976 amendment act would apply, as the commission was empowered to amend or revoke at any time in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 04 2002 (HC)

B. Gowra Reddy Vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by Its Secretary, ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR2002AP313; 2002(3)ALT439

..... that in the case of the list of wakfs relating to any part of the state and published or purporting to have been published before the commencement of the wakf (amendment) act, 1969, such suit may be entertained by the civil court within the period of one year from such commencement. explanation.- for the purposes of this section and section 6a, the expression ..... property. since we are of the view that at the time when the wakfs commissioner was conducting the enquiry the property had not vested in the state government under the land acquisition proceedings, it was not incumbent upon the wakfs commissioner to issue any notice to the state government in those proceedings and the said proceedings could not be held to have ..... year from the date of the notification. thus, once the assistant collector and the collector had jurisdiction to decide, their decision became final and section 13 of the panchayat act punjab village common land (regulation) act, 1961 barred the civil suit filed by the wakf board. 21. the decisions cited by the learned counsel for wakf board need to be taken note of while ..... sustainable in law as it is in gross violation of the provisions contained in sections 4 to 6 of the act. in support of his submission, he relies upon the decisions in muslim wakfs board, rajasthan v. radha kishan 1 and punjab wakf board v. gram panchayat 2.8. on the other hand, the leaned government pleader and the learned counsel appearing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 2002 (SC)

Nagpur Improvement Trust Vs. Vasantrao and ors. and Jaswantibai and or ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2002SC3499; 2002(6)ALD12(SC); 2002(4)ALLMR(SC)905; 2003(1)AWC161(SC); JT2002(7)SC447; (2003)1MLJ22(SC); 2002(7)SCALE307; (2002)7SCC657; [2002]SUPP2SCR636

..... equities arose under the two actsand, therefore, the high court was not justified in holding thateven in respect of the acquisition under the punjab act, theclaimants were entitled to the benefit of beneficial provisionsunder the land acquisition act as brought in by amending theland acquisition act by act no. 68 of 1984. he sought todistinguish the judgments relied upon by the respondents andsubmitted that having regard to the principle laid ..... down by thiscourt in maneklal chhotalal and ors. v. m.g. makwanaand ors. : [1967]3scr65 : [1967]3scr65 and state of gujarat v.shantilal mangaldas and ors. : [1969]3scr341 : [1969]3scr341 , it ..... provisions of section 6 including the proviso theretoapply to acquisitions under the nagpur act. since the notice undersection 39 of the nagpur act corresponding to the notificationunder section 4 of the land acquisition act was first published inthe official gazette on 25th december, 1969 and the subsequentnotification under section 45 corresponding to the declarationunder section 6 of the land acquisition act was published on 18thseptember, 1974 i.e. after more .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 1994 (SC)

Mehtab Singh and Others Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1995SC667; JT1994(5)SC394; (1995)110PLR47; 1994(3)SCALE876; (1994)6SCC64; [1994]Supp2SCR793

..... complete at the district judge's level under the law as it stood prior to the land acquisition (amendment) act, 1984. the land acquisition collector was thus ordered to pay solatium @ 15% and interest @ 6% payable under the law then existing.3. some dissatisfied land-owners, including the appellants, moved the punjab and haryana high court in first appeals claiming a higher rate of compensation. a learned single ..... of haryana and ors. decided on 16.11.1979 was pressed into service wherein some lands in contiguous villages hasanpur, parnala and bahadurgarh were acquired under notification under section 4 issued on 17.10.1969, i.e. about 7 years and 2 months prior to the instant acquisition, where rate of rs. 10 per square yard was granted. taking that as a foundation ..... another single judge's decision of that court in inder singh v. state of punjab , was pressed into service as a reaction to opine that the amendment act of 1984 had brought ..... for an acquisition of october 17, 1969 on the finding that during the year 1968-69 the value of the land in the vicinity of the land acquired was between rs. 5.90 to 8.33 per square yard and so it was appropriate to fix the market value of the acquired land at the rate of rs. 10 per square yard. there the land acquisition collector .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 10 1988 (HC)

Balraj Ahuja Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1989P& H273

..... , compensation is to be determined and given.9. by the constitution (forty-fourth amendment) act, 1978, with effect from june 20, 1979, article 31 relating to compulsory acquisition of property was omitted. the decision of the supreme court in air 1977 sc 915 in which the validity of the punjab land reforms act, 1972, was upheld on the basis of arts. 31a, 31b and 31c was ..... the learned counsel. article 31 only conferred or recognised powerof compulsory acquisition of property on thestate and while conferring ..... delivered on jan. 27, 1977 prior to the deletion of article 31 by the constitution (forty-fourth amendment) act, 1978.10. according to ..... .8. the scope of clauses (1) and (2) of article 31 and constitution (fourth amendment) act, 1955, introducing clause (2a) of article 31 was considered by the supreme court in state of gujaratv. shantilal mangaldas, air 1969 sc 634, and it was held that the principal effect of the amendment was to snap the link, which according to the supreme court in a prior .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 23 1995 (HC)

Mahli Devi Vs. Chander Bhan and Others

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 1995IAD(Delhi)1434; AIR1995Delhi293; 58(1995)DLT162; 1995(33)DRJ121

..... on which the argument has been advanced before us. moreover, this reasoning does not hold goods any more in view of the amendment of section 26 of the land acquisition act in the year 1921 by act 19 of 1921. by the said amendment sub-section (2) was added to sec. 26. sub-section (2) reads as under: -'(2) every such award shall be deemed to ..... a strong reason why the said view should not be departed from. the learnedcounsel has referred to nirshi v. sudhir kumar, : [1969]1scr469 ; india electric works ltd. v. james mantosh, : [1971]2scr397 ; and mahant dharam das v. state of punjab, : [1975]3scr160 in support of this view. agreeing with this proposition we consider that it is not desirable to upset the consistent ..... for consideration in siri chand sheo lal v. union of india, . the case was decided by a division bench of the punjab high court sitting in circuit at delhi. in view of the language of section 54 of the act it was observed that this section did not contain any prohibition against filing of a second appeal unlike sub-section (2) of ..... did not contain any specific bar to right of secondappeal was placed section 54 of the act and it was observed that the order of the high court passed in an appeal under section 54 of the act was appealable in view of the decision of the punjab high court in shrichand sheo lat (supra). another instance cited of similar statutory provision was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 11 1972 (SC)

Rajkumar Devindra Singh and anr. Vs. the State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1973SC66; (1973)1SCC51; [1973]2SCR166

..... of the decision of this court in northern india caterers private ltd. and anr. v. state of punjab and anr. [1957] 3 s.c.r 399. but the punjab legislature amended the act by passing the punjab public premises and land (eviction and rent recovery) amendment act, 1969. by section 102 of the amendment act, the jurisdiction of the civil court, among other things, to entertain a suit or proceeding for ..... in unauthorised occupation of public premises. section 2(d) of the act defines 'public premises' as under :public premises means any premises belonging to, or taken on lease or requisitioned by, or on behalf of, the state government, or requisitioned by the competent authority under the punjab requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act, 1953, and includes any premises belonging to any district board ..... , municipal committee, notified area committee or panchayat.section 3 of the act deals with what is unauthorised occupation of public premises. that section says :for purposes of this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 12 1994 (SC)

K.S. Paripoornan Vs. State of Kerala and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1995SC1012; JT1994(6)SC182; 1996(7)KarLJ299; 1994(4)SCALE192; (1994)5SCC593; [1994]Supp3SCR405

..... of india v. filip tiago de gama [1989] supp. 2 scr 336. in that case, the land acquisition officer declared the award on march 5,1969, and on reference the civil court made the award on may 28, 1985, i.e., after the commencement of the amending act. it was held that the entitlement of additional amount provided under section 23(1-a) depends upon ..... is a constitution bench decision and k. kamalajammiavaru (dead) by lrs. v. special land acquisition officer : [1985]2scr914 , bhag singh and ors. v. union territory of chandigarh : air1985sc1576 and state of punjab v. mohinder singh and anr. : air1987sc758 are all on the interpretation of amended sections 23(2) and 28 of the principal act and, therefore on the interpretation of section 30 (2) of the ..... amending act.in vasco de gama (supra), the facts were that the acquisition proceedings were commenced with the notification published under section 4 ..... of sub-section (1-a) of section 23 was not cut down by the transitory provisions contained in sub-section (1) of section 30 of the amending act. a division bench of the high court of punjab and haryana took the same view in maya devi v. union territory of chandigarh [1988] punj. lj 189. the kerala high court in the judgment under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 1977 (HC)

Agro-industrial Trading Corporation Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Reported in : 1988(38)ELT618(Ker)

..... of the appeal. their lordships were not prepared to accept the amendment made to section 26(2) of the land acquisition act as conferring a right of appeal. it was observed:'it was not part of the land acquisition act when the local act was passed, for in adopting the provisions of the land acquisition act is there anything to suggest that the bengal legislature intended to bind ..... bed-sheets, bed-spreads, counter-panes and table cloth, but do not include any such fabric -xxx xxx xxx xxx'this was the definition till it was amended by the finance act of 1969. the amended definition, (to notice only its relevant portion) reads:-'19 cotton fabrics - 'cotton fabrics' means all varieties of fabrics manufactures either wholly or partly from cotton ..... considered was whether the definition of 'agricultural land' given in the punjab pre-emption act, 1913. which adopted the definition in the punjab alienation of land act, 1900, would be affected by the repeal of the latter act. section 3(1) of the 1913 act defined agricultural land' to mean 'land as defined in the punjab alienation of land act, 1900'. this latter act was repealed in 1951, and the argument ..... there was no warrant to import the definition of 'cotton fabrics', in item 19 of the central excises and salt act as amended by the finance act, 1969 into item 4 of schedule iii of the madras general sales tax act. schedule iii had therefore to be construed independently of any definition given under any other statute. so construing, it was .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //