Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the land acquisition punjab amendment act 1969 Court: gujarat Page 1 of about 115 results (0.046 seconds)

Oct 01 1979 (HC)

Rajiv Ramanlal and anr. Vs. Ashok Mills Ltd. and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1979)2GLR464

..... (sixth amendment) act in 1956, the restriction placed by article 286(3) prior to its amendment in respect of essential goods was lifted an the amended section 5 took effect thereafter in respect of all such goods also.39. in state of mysore and anr. v. d. achih chetty etc. : [1969]3scr55 , the supreme court was considering the scope and effect of bangalore acquisition of lands (validation) act ..... that act of 1952 purported to amend a still-born law. insertion of amended section 5 with retrospective effect was held valid. however, the amended section 5 could not take effect either prospectively ..... void. but merely because section 5 was void it did not render sections 4 and 6 and the other sections of that act void. they remained only unenforceable until new section 5 was inserted. section 5 as amended by east punjab act 19 of 1952 was not invalid on the ground of excessive delegation of legislative authority nor was it invalid on the ground ..... will be no scope for the application of the doctrine of eclipse.38. the next decision is in the state of punjab v. m/s sansari mal puran chand : [1968]1scr336 . it was a case under the east punjab general sales tax act, 1948. in that case, constitutional validity inter alia, of section 5 was challenged. the supreme court held that section 5 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 30 1990 (HC)

Mansukhlal Popatlal Kanakhra Vs. State of Gujarat and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1990)2GLR1145

..... petitioner is entitled to 30% solatium on the enhanced compensation and interest at the rate of 9%.3. this contention is raised by placing reliance on amended section 23(2) of the land acquisition act of the amending act. it is submitted that the petitioner's claim for compensation was pending since 1983 and it came to be decided by this court in special civil application ..... no. 4153 of 1983 on 10-12-1984, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of this amended provision as brought on the statute book by land acquisition (amending) act, 68 of 1984. it is not possible to agree with this contention. the petitioner's case would have stood on a firmer footing if earlier decision ..... that the compensation which he has got should be enhanced by paying him 30% solatium and 15% interest as per the provisions of sections 28 and 23(2) of the land acquisition act, 1894. as amended by act 68 of 1984.2. these proceedings have a chequered history, and therefore, it would be necessary to give a few introductory facts. the petitioner's ..... of the supreme court in state of punjab v. mohinder singh : air1987sc758 had survived because in that case, three learned judges of the supreme court had clearly taken .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 1999 (HC)

Chhotubhai Chhikabhai Patel Poa Roshanbhai C. Patel Vs. Special Land A ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2000)2GLR359

..... to be competent as having been taken under the land acquisition act by an authority authorised under the act itself.12. once presidential notification entrusting the functions of union of india under the land acquisition act to be exercised by the government of gujarat came into existence which has the force of law, it resulted in amendment of the land acquisition act pro tanto, by treating the state government to ..... be the appropriate government in relation to acquisition of land for the purposes of union, and the power of acquiring land for the purpose of union too becomes the power exercisable by the state of gujarat under ..... and executive, may be placed in the category of miscellaneous functions. the apex court reiterated the view taken by it on earlier occasion in ram jawaya v. state of punjab air 1955 sc 549 that it may not be possible to frame an exhaustive definition of what the executive functions means and implies. ordinarily the executive power connotes the residue ..... chatterjee v. state of west bengal and others (1969) 3 scc 675 the supreme court observed:'section 5a provides that any person interested in any of the land notified under section 4(1) as being needed or likely to be needed for a public purpose may object to the acquisition of the land or any land in the locality. the collector must consider the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 2004 (HC)

Krishnamurarilal G. Agrawal Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (2004)2GLR959

..... has delegated to the district magistrate.'based on the aforesaid two decisions, mr. vin has submitted that section 17a of the gujarat amendment act would not over ride the effect of the powers conferred on the central government under the land acquisition act.16. mr. s.n. shelat, learned advocate general with learned agp mrs. harsha devani, appearing for the respondent state submitted that pursuant ..... that for which its possession was taken. he has further submitted that the word 'vests' used in section 17a is a word of variable import. sections 16 & 17 of the land acquisition act provide that the property so acquired, upon the happening of certain events, shall 'vests absolutely in the government free from all encumbrances'. in the cases contemplated by sections 16 & 17 ..... ) of the constitution of india and by virtue of the said notification, the president with the consent of the state government, entrusted the functions of the central government under the land acquisition act, 1894 to the state government. he has further submitted that a proposal was received from the central government i.e. the acquiring body for acquiring the subject ..... of provisions contained in section 17a of the act is concerned, mr. vin has submitted that it has no application to the facts of the present case. in this connection, he has invited our attention to the decision of the hon'ble supreme court in the case of sat pal v/s. state of punjab and others, 1982 (1) s.c.c .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1969 (HC)

Musamiyan Imam Haidarbux Razvi and ors. Vs. the State of Gujarat and o ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1971Guj158; (1971)0GLR1

..... society ltd., ahmedabad, with the sanction of the government'. these words were obviously taken from the extended definition of 'public purpose' introduced in section 3 (f) by the land acquisition (bombay amendment) act, 1948. though this statement of the public purpose in section 6 notification was worded slightly differently from that contained in section 4 notification, the case of the respondents was that ..... acquisition was made was a public purpose. but this extended definition was ab initio void as the entire land acquisition (bombay amendment) act, 1948, was declared ultra vires by the supreme court in jeejeebhoy v. assistant collector, thana : [1965]1scr636 and the satisfaction ..... reason. the words in which the public purpose is expressed in the impugned section 6 notifications are borrowed verbatim from the extended definition of 'public purpose' introduced by the land acquisition (bombay amendment) act, 1948, and the argument of the petitioners, therefore, was that it was by reason of this extended definition that the purpose for which ..... only in regard to the question of need but also in regard to the question whether the purpose for which the land is needed is a public purpose. as pointed out by the supreme court in somavanti v. state of punjab, air 1963 sc 151:'it is the existence of the need for a public purpose which gives jurisdiction to the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 2014 (HC)

ionik Metallics and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Gujarat

..... of the supreme court, on a comparative study of the land acquisition act, 1894 and the land acquisition (madras amendment) act, came to the conclusion that if a land is acquired for a housing scheme under the amending act, the claimant gets a lesser value than he would get for the same land or a similar land if it is acquired for a public purpose like hospital under ..... leaving others under the guidelines of the rbi. 42. in the case of harbilas rai bansal v. state of punjab and anr reported in (1996) 1 scc 1, the controversy was that by the impugned amendment of the rent act, it created two classes of landlords, one for the commercial premises and the other for residential premises, which the ..... govt. of kerala 34.madhya pradesh financial corporationstate govt. of mp 35.maharashtrastatefinancial corporationstate govt. of maharastra 36.orissastatefinancial corporationstate govt. of orissa 37.punjabfinancial corporationstate govt. of punjab 38.rajasthan financialcorporationstate govt. of rajasthan 39.uttar pradesh financial corporationstate govt. of up. 40.west bengalfinancial corporationstate govt. of wb 41.tamilnadu industrial investment corporation ltd.state ..... the case made out by the petitioners in sca no. 14908 of 2012 may be summed up thus: [a]. the petitioners are the borrowers and/or guarantors of punjab national bank, which is the respondent no.2 in this writ-petition, whose account with the respondent-bank had allegedly become non performing assets [npa, for short hereafter] .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 12 1963 (HC)

Patel Mangalbhai Nathabhai and ors. Vs. State of Gujarat, Revenue and ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1964Guj82; (1964)0GLR329

..... notifications issued under sections 4 and 6 of the land acquisition act 1 of 1894, as amended by the land acquisition (amendment) act, xxxi of 1962, and for restraining the respondents from enforcing them or taking any further proceedings thereunder, for declaring that the amendments inserted by the aforesaid act xxxi of 1962 in sections 40 and 41 of the principal act, are ultra vires the constitution and restraining the respondents ..... part of the compensation was to come out of the public revenues and the provisions of part vii of the land acquisition act had not been complied, with. these two decisions clearly negative the contention of mr. nanavaty.8. the petition challenges the amendment act xxxi of 1962 on several grounds set out in the petition. mr. nanavaty, appearing for the petitioners, has however ..... oat of that public funds. the suggestion, in our view, is ill founded. as explained in jhandu lal v. the state of punjab, air 1961 sc 343, the land acquisition act deals with two kinds of acquisitions, (i) for a public purpose at the cost of the government, and (2) for a purpose aim to such a purpose at the cost of a company, ..... unreasonable. in smt. somawanti v. the state of punjab, air 1963 sc 151, the supreme court has observed at p. 161 that the object of the acquisition law is to empower government to acquire land only for a public purpose or for a company, and the acquisition for a company contemplated by part vii of the act is confined only to cases where the government .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 1972 (HC)

Madhukantaben Vs. the State of Gujarat and anr.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1973Guj176; (1973)0GLR506

..... the appropriate government shall declare in the official gazette that it is customary for the government to make such provision of the housing schemes as defined in the land acquisition bombay amendment act. 1948. by the aforesaid amendment sub-clause (3) was added as under :--'and (3) a housing scheme which the state government may from time to time undertake for the purpose of increasing ..... if they failed to lodge their objections as admitted by this widow they had clearly waived their right. in east india co. v. official liquidator. raj ratna mills (1969) 11 guj lr 457. division bench consisting of the learned chief justice and vakil j. in terms pointed out at page 479 that audit alteram partem rule did not require ..... on this amendment definition their lordships in terms held at page 985 that the proposed acquisition was clearly for a public purpose. at page 986 their lordships further supported their conclusion in this regard by relying on the earlier decision in jhandulal v. state of punjab, air 1961 sc 343. further proceeding it was in terms held that their lordships were unable to ..... government was not shown to be fraudulent one the declaration issued under section 6 was the conclusive evidence of the fact that the land in question was needed for a public purpose as decided in somvanti v. state of punjab. air 1963 sc 151 which categorically laid down that conclusiveness in section 6 (3) must necessarily attach not merely to the need .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1991 (HC)

ismail Gulam Mahmad Davji Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1991)2GLR865

..... declaration and if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the land shall lapse:provided that in a case where the said declaration has been published before the commencement of the land acquisition (amendment) act, 1894, the award shall be made within a period of two years from such ..... required to make an award within a period of two years from the date of the publication of the declaration under section 6 of the land acquisition act that the land is required for public purpose. the phrase 'the date of publication of the declaration' is given meaning under sub-section (2) of ..... dismissed as learned advocate, who was appearing on behalf of the respondents, had submitted that the decision to issue notification under section 6 of the land acquisition act was taken on 12th august 1984. this also means that the petitioners were aware about section 6 notification.10. in view of the aforesaid facts, ..... that date should not be taken into consideration for holding that the award passed by the land acquisition officer on 2nd november, 1987 is within time. for this purpose, he has relied upon judgment of the punjab and haryana high court in the case of satish kapur v. state of haryana and anr ..... has relied upon the full bench decision of that court in the case of rattan singh and anr. v. the state of punjab and ors. air 1976 punjab and haryana 279 and has held that even a few dayss' delay between the publication of the notification in the gazette and the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 08 1966 (HC)

Mohan Mulji Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Rajpila, District Br ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : AIR1967Guj154; (1966)GLR879

..... the intention of the government was that the benefit of the exemption should be available not only to applications to the collector for reference under s. 18 of the land acquisition act made after the amendment but also to pending applications. this contention is however, not well-founded for the words 'to be filed, executed or recorded in any civil or criminal court' are ..... 3529-d dated 13th september, 1963 did not take an application to the collector for a reference under section 18 of the land acquisition act, there was a subsequent notification issued by the government of gujarat on 14th june 1965 which amended the earlier notification so as to include within the scope and ambit of the earlier notification an application to the collector for ..... september 1963 and not the notification dated 14th june 1965. the appellants could not, therefore, claim the benefit of the exemption granted under the amendment in respect of the applications made by them to the special land acquisition officer. some reliance was placed on behalf of the appellants on the facts that words of futurity similar to the words 'to be filed, ..... to hold that the order making the references was incorrect or improper. this contention was sought to be supported by reference to the decisions of the allahabad, patna, madhya pradesh, punjab and madras high courts in secretary of state v. bhagwan prasad : air1929all769 ; state of u.p. v. abdul karim : air1963all556 ; lila mahton v. sheo govind, air 1956 pat 108; .....

Tag this Judgment!


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