Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the land acquisition punjab amendment act 1969 Court: mumbai Page 1 of about 215 results (0.042 seconds)

Dec 06 2007 (HC)

Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation Through Its Chief Execu ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(1)ALLMR654; 2008(2)BomCR34; (2008)110BOMLR63; 2008(1)MhLj813

..... to the further proceedings in respect of the application made to the collector within sixty days of determination. therefore, as far as such proceedings are concerned subsequent amendments to part-iii of land acquisition act would also apply to them. arguments of shri agnihotri, learned advocate for the appellant to the contrary have therefore, to be rejected. the learned advocate ..... the purpose of further proceedings, after an application is made to the collector within sixty days from the decision by the collector. he submitted that amendment to section 18 of the land acquisition act, which provides for a reference to be made by a person within six weeks of the award, if such person was present at the time ..... in the nagpur act and, therefore, the provisions of section 6 including the proviso thereto apply to acquisitions under the nagpur act. since the notice under section 39 of the nagpur act corresponding to the notification under section 4 of the land acquisition act was first published in the official gazette on 25th december, 1969 and the subsequent ..... pieces of legislation in punjab and utter pradesh. in this respect the apex court observed as under:4. in the appeals which relate to the acquisitions under the nagpur act, the appellant, namely the nagpur improvement trust, has impugned the judgment and order of the high court of bombay (nagpur bench), nagpur, holding that the land acquisition act is merely referred to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 16 1996 (HC)

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Sou. Kamlabai Vishwanath Bagad and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1997(3)BomCR597

..... also we have to consider as to whether the amendments made to land acquisition act, 1894 by the central act no. 68 of 1984 could be made applicable ipso facto ..... is no separate machinery provided for acquiring the land and the acquisitions under both these acts are made under the land acquisition act, 1894. in the aforesaid case before the supreme court, the question was whether for the purpose of acquiring the land, the amended provisions of land acquisition act, 1894 could be made applicable ipso facto to the acquisitions of lands under the punjab town improvement act, 1922 or not. in the present case ..... to the acquisitions of lands under the maharashtra regional & town planning act, 1966. according to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 1976 (HC)

Sadashiv Karu Jamdade and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1977Bom355

..... nos, 2 and 3 are his sons, is directed against a notification issued by the commissioner, poona division, poona, under section 6 of the land acquisition act, and a government resolution no. rpa-1069-r. i. dated 31st october 1969.2. field survey no. 534/4 area 3 acres 6 gunthas is owned by petitioner no. 2 and field survey no. 579/48 stands ..... persons was clearly a public purpose for which a notification for acquisition of land under the provisions of the land acquisition act could validly be taken, if any authority is needed for the proposition that acquisition of land for the purposes of village sites is a public purpose, it can be found in the decisions of the punjab and tbe patna high courts relied upon by the learned ..... soon as may be after it is made, be laid before each house of parliament.' it may be stated that clause (1a) above was added by the constitution thirty-eighth amendment act, 1975. the words 'enforcement of rights' are to be found also in article 226 of the constitution of india as also in article 32 of the constitution of india-article ..... counsel for the petitioner in special civil application no. 2908 of 1974. counsel for petitioners heavily relied on the decision of the supreme court in makhan singh v. state of punjab, : 1964crilj217 , a decision on which the learned advocate general appearing for the state of maharashtra also heavily relies for the proposition that a mere mention of article 14 in a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 1993 (HC)

Shri Ramanand Laximidhar Kunde and anr. Vs. Special Land Acquisition O ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1994(2)BomCR502; (1994)96BOMLR992

..... ; and (c) whether fresh application for re-determination is necessary after high court's order in appeal. 4. section 28-a of the land acquisition act was brought into the statute book by way of amendment under the provisions of land acquisition (amendment) act, 1984. it reads thus :'28-a. re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the court.---(1) where ..... to him for fresh decision in the light of the observations made. the court had observed that the land acquisition collector had not understood the scope of section 28-a as the application was ..... to section 18 of the act.from time to time various aspects of this matter and interpretation of section 28-a fell for consideration before different courts.9. in the decision of jagdish ram v. state of haryana, 1991 1a.c.c. (p.&h.;) 381, the punjab and haryana high court set aside the order of the land acquisition collector and remanded the matter ..... the award of the district court is not acceptable.10. in another decision in jagdish raj v. state of punjab (through the land acquisition officer 1991 l.a.c.c. (p.&h.;) 43, a division bench set aside the order of the land acquisition collector. the land acquisition collector rejected the application filed on behalf of the widow and legal heirs of jagdish raj on the ground .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 27 2002 (HC)

The State of Maharashtra Vs. Sheshrao Ganpatrao Shelke

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (2002)104BOMLR527

..... further that when the reference were pending before the learned civil judge, the bill to amend the land acquisition act was introduced in the loksabha and it has become an act on 26th sept., 1984. the applicability of the amended act, according to the counsel, is no more res integra, in view of the constitutional ..... confirm the judgment of the civil court. but in view of the latest pronouncements of the apex court in interpreting section 25 after amendment in case of land acquisition officer v, m/s. b.v. reddy and sons, (supra) the apex court has held that section 25 is not a ..... my opinion, the claimants are not entitled for enhanced compensation as they have not lodged the claim as required under section 9 of the land acquisition act. shri solshe learned counsel, submitted that this point was not raised before the reference court nor in the memorandum of appeal. it is ..... v. jagiarsingh : [1991]2scr790 in view of the law laid down by the apex court, the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents cannot be accepted. the claimants are not entitled for any benefit on the basis of act no. 68/ 94.28 ..... amended act even though the reference was pending before the civil court when the bill was introduced in the parliament, the condition precedent for awarding additional statutory benefit arise only when the court or the appellate court enhanced the compensation. this issue has been settled by the apex court in the reported judgment in state of punjab .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 1992 (HC)

Sharadchandra S/O. Biharilal Paliwal Vs. the State of Maharashtra

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1994(4)BomCR633; (1992)94BOMLR735

..... 24th september, 1984 and to appeals pending in high court or supreme court arising out of awards by collector or court between said two dates.section 30(2) of the land acquisition (amendment) act, 1984 extends the benefit of the enhanced solatium to cases where the award by the collector or by the court was made between 30th april, 1982 and 24th september, 1984 ..... is made clear by their lordships of the supreme court that in case the award is passed by the land acquisition officer or the claim has been decided by the reference court between 30th april, 1982 and 24th september, 1984, the provisions of amended section 23 would be applicable.the pronouncement of the verdict by their lordships of the supreme court is dated ..... village sihora. thus, the findings being not just and proper, the appellant made reference. the learned civil judge (senior division), bhandara who decided the reference under section 18 of the land acquisition act simply rejected the contention of the appellant on the ground that he has adduced no evidence and, therefore, he is not entitled for any compensation than granted by the ..... the notification until the date of the award by the collector'.this judgment is dated 8th february, 1988.7. a reliance has been placed on the case of state of punjab v. mohinder singh and anr., : air1987sc758 . the order passed by the hon'ble supreme court is as under :'heard counsel for the parties. we find no merit in this appeal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 1964 (HC)

SadruddIn Suleman Jhaveri Vs. J.H. Patwardhan and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1965Bom224; (1965)67BOMLR101; ILR1965Bom394; 1965MhLJ290

..... by the adaptation of laws order, 1950 and the following words in sub-clause (1) of clause (f) were added by the land acquisition (bombay amendment) act, 1948 (bombay amendment) act, 1948'. 'and a housing scheme as defined in the land acquisition (bombay amendment) act, 1948'.(15) the other amendment made was to add sub-clause (2) to clause (f) of section 3 containing the definition of 'public purpose' as follows ..... by the highest court in somawanti v. state of punjab : [1963]2scr774 . at p. 160 in the same passage which we quote below the supreme court also repelled the argument that it infringed article 31 of the constitution. in paragraph 21 of the judgment, mr. justice. mudholkar observed with reference to the land acquisition act:'the act has been in operation since 1894. the validity ..... upon the public revenue. this contention is based upon certain observations of the supreme court in the case which we have already referred to of jhandu lal v. state of punjab : [1961]2scr459 . chief justice sinha in stating the decision of the high court in that case indicated at p. 466 (of scr) : (at p. 346 of air). 'it has been ..... in a similar case and, therefore, those powers tended to work a possible discrimination against certain persons. the argument was negatived in niemla textile finishing mills. ltd. v. the 2nd punjab industrial tribunal 1957 scr 335 : ( (s) air 1957 sc 329 , as follows:-'we are unable to accept these contentions. having regard to the provisions of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 2003 (HC)

The State of Maharashtra Through Collector Vs. Gangadhar S/O Girmalapp ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2003(2)MhLj881

..... section 4 notification was issued on 11th march, 1980 and the award came to be passed on 17th march, 1982. the bill to amend the land acquisition act was introduced in the house of the people on 30th april,1982 and the land acquisition amendment act, 68 of 1984 came into force from 26th september, 1984. section 23(1a) reads thus: 23(1a): in addition to the ..... agp further submitted that the claimants are not at all entitled for the benefit of section 23(1a) of the act as amended in 1984 as the notification and the award was issued and passed prior to the commencement of amended land acquisition act. the learned agp submitted that the claimants are not at all entitled to 12% increase on the total market value ..... proceedings is governed exclusively by sub-section (1) of section 30 of the amending act. a perusal of sub-section (1) of section 30 of the amending act shows that it divides the proceedings for acquisition of land which had commenced prior to the date of the commencement of the amending act into two categories, proceedings which had commenced prior to 30-4-1982 and proceedings ..... khandare learned agp has placed reliance on the following judgments of the apex court : 1) kamlabai jageshwar joshi vs. state of maharashtra reported in : air1996sc981 state of punjab vs. jagirsingh. 3) : (1996)10scc627 special land acquisition officer, dharvad vs. tazer hanifbee. 4) krishi utpadan mandi samiti vs. malik sartaj khan : (2001)10scc660 . 5) kasturi and others vs. state of haryana reported .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 2015 (HC)

Panjabrao Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Through its, Principal Secreta ...

Court : Mumbai Aurangabad

..... , further argued that considering the legislative history, statement of objects and reasons, as well as preamble to the act of 2013, impugned notifications are unsustainable. according to him, other states like rajasthan, uttar pradesh, punjab etc. have introduced the land acquisition bills in the line of act of 2013 and provided for factor ranging from 1.5 to 4.5 by which the market value ..... at a radial distance of more than 25 kilometers from urban area, the state has virtually caused an amendment to the first schedule of the act of 2013 in order to reduce the amount of compensation payable to land holders. the first schedule to the act of 2013 is part and parcel of that statute and the state government being an appropriate government could ..... . the subsequent such notification dtd. 13.8.2014 (exh.e) substituted multiplier of 1 by 1, 1.05 and 1.10 as per distance of the land proposed to be acquired from urban area. this amendment of the multiplier factor is brought into force w.e.f. 13.8.2014 as seen from the notification dtd.13.8.2014. let us therefore ..... 2 (two). miss talekar further argued that in terms of the provisions of section 106 of the act of 2013, even the central government cannot amend or alter any schedule to the act of 2013 in order to reduce compensation or for violating the provisions of the act of 2013 relating to compensation. in his submission, by issuing the impugned notification, respondent/state has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 14 1983 (HC)

All India Reporter Ltd. Vs. Nagpur Improvement Trust

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1983)85BOMLR321

..... it supports the petitioners. there the question for consideration before the full bench of the punjab and haryana court was whether section 6 of the land acquisition act, 1984 as amended by the ordinance and the act of 1967 was applicable to the notification under section 42 of the punjab town improvement act, 1922 which as we have seen above corresponds to section 45 of the n.i ..... ), published after the commencement of the land acquisition (amendment and validation) ordinance, 1907, shall be made after the expiry of three years from the date of such publication.this proviso has been inserted by the ordinance referred to therein which was subsequently converted into an act of parliament.8. the trust by its resolution passed on may 7, 1969, resolved to frame a scheme under ..... total area would be used for the above-said purposes respectively. in pursuance of this resolution the trust published a notice under section 39 of the n.i.t. act, on december 15, 1969. the area covered by the scheme inter alia comprises khasra number 13/2, 19/3 and 9.10.35/2 of bhamti belonging to the petitioner in writ ..... not to provide house sites for residential or commercial purposes. referring to the resolution which the trust passed on may 7, 1969 for framing the scheme and the notice issued by the trust under section 39 of the n.i.t. act, copies of which are at annexures a and e in writ petition no. 1370 of 1975, he submitted that out .....

Tag this Judgment!


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