Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the land acquisition punjab amendment act 1969 Year: 1988 Page 1 of about 48 results (0.089 seconds)

May 10 1988 (HC)

Balraj Ahuja Vs. State of Punjab

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-10-1988

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!

Aug 04 1988 (HC)

Nikka Singh and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Aug-04-1988

Reported in : AIR1989P& H100

..... account of such use or waste.(2) all questions, including questions pending for disposal on the commencement of the northern india canal and drainage (punjab) amendment act, 1965, under section 33 or section 34 shall be decided by the collector,(3) an appeal shall lie to the commissioner against the decision ..... various revenue estates from times immemorial. natural flow of rain water from shivalik range drains out from this chao. respondent 1, the state of punjab, constructed a bandh at dhikansu in early 1970 to save rajpura town in patiala district from devastation on account of flood water. the water ..... of the order, revise an order passed in appeal under sub-section (3),'10. section 33 deals with the liability of persons on whose land canal water has flowed and has been used unauthorisedly. section 34 imposes liability on all persons who are driving water where it is not possible ..... unauthorised manner, and if the person by whose act or neglect such use has occurred cannot be identified.the person on whose land such water has flowed, if such land has derived benefit therefrom. nor if such person cannot be identified, or if such land has not derived benefit therefrom, all the persons ..... chargeable in respect of the water supplied through such canalshall be liable or jointly liable, as the case may be, to the charges made for such use.''34. if water supplied through a canal be suffered to run to waste, the persons through whose act .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 11 1988 (SC)

State of Uttar Pradesh ors. Vs. Radhey Shyam Nigam and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-11-1988

Reported in : AIR1989SC682; JT1989(1)SC58; 1989(1)SCALE50; (1989)1SCC591; [1989]1SCR92; 1989(1)LC327(SC)

..... .p. legislature in 1973. on or about 11th of september, 1974, lucknow had been declared to be a development area by a notification. on or about 24th of september, 1984 land acquisition (amendment) act, 1984 was made effective subsequent to the 24th of september, 1984. on the 8th of december, 1984 a notification under section 4(1) and a declaration under section 6 of ..... the amendment of the act by the amending act no. 68 of 1984 it was permissible for the government to issue notification under section 4 of the act and to make declaration as contemplated under section 6 of the act simultaneously and it was further permissible to publish both the notifications simultaneously as held by this court in smt. somawanti and ors. v. state of punjab : 1963 ..... taking of the possession of the land under section 17(2)(c) of the act. a bench of five judges of this court inter alia held that '. simultaneous publication ..... there was urgency and that the provisions of section 5-a shall not apply to the acquisition. in the same gazette, another notification under section 6 of the act dated august 19, 1961 was published to the effect that the governor of punjab was satisfied that the land was required by the government at public expenses for public purpose. the notification provided for immediate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 28 1988 (HC)

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Roshan Lal

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-28-1988

Reported in : AIR1989HP67

..... has been quantified at rs. 12,500/-. 4. the claim aforesaid is sought to be founded by the learned counsel upon the provisions of section 23(1-a) of the act as introduced in the act by the land acquisition amendment act, 1984 (act 68 of 1984). section 23(1-a) is in the following terms :-- 23(1a) in addition to market value of the ..... the same.............. the learned advocate general relied upon the decision reported in air 1987 punj & har 222 (fb) (state of punjab v. krishan lal) to give a restricted meaning to section 23(1-a) read with section 30 of the amending act. for the reasons indicated earlier, i am inclined to accept the view of the karnataka and andhra pradesh high courts and ..... i am not able to accept the view of the punjab and haryana high court.' 11. turning now to the decision of the ..... punjab and haryana high court, we find that, after noticing the conflict of views in certain decisions and the relevant statutory provisions, the learned judges .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 14 1988 (HC)

Satbir Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-14-1988

Reported in : AIR1988All177

..... 3, submitted before us that the provision ofi land acquisition act was amended by u.p. act no. 8 of 1974. therefore, in uttar pradesh the amendment effected by central act no. 68 of 1984 would not be relevant and for the purpose of section 4 of the. land acquisition act only publication in the official gazette would be ..... , having regard to the growth of population, can be termed as an urgent and pressing necessity, therefore, the dispensation of the provisions of land acquisition act under section 5a cannot be said to be improper in the facts and circumstances of the cases under consideration. the contention of the learned counsel ..... . 3058/xi-5-85-11(4) land acquisition act relates to notification under section 4 of the land acquisition act, 1894 and was published in the gazette on 11-6-1985 whereas notification no. 3637/xi-5-85-11-(4) land acquisition act relates to notification under section 6 of the land acquisition act and was published in the gazette on ..... the counsel for the opposite parties placed reliance upon the rulings reported in air 1963 sc 151, smt. somwanti v. state of punjab and air 1979, sc 1713, babu singh v. union of india and they have tried to justify the stand that notifications under sections 4 ..... the petitioners' land was not under a development plan.27. our attention during the course of arguments was drawn to the ruling reported in air 1980 sc 319, state of punjab v. gurdiyal singh as well as the ruling reported in air 1981 sc 818, swadeshi cotton mills v. union .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 03 1988 (HC)

Vijay S/O Pundlik Band and ors. Vs. Amravati University Through Its Vi ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-03-1988

Reported in : 1989(1)BomCR364

..... on 19-9-1986 was not communicated to the petitioners within two years of the coming into force of the amended section 11-a of the land acquisition act and hence the entire acquisition proceedings and the award had lapsed.2. in the said suit, the petitioners also claimed the interim relief of injunction against the amravati university restraining it from disturbing the possession ..... applicants mainly based his pleadings on the rulings and interpretation of sections 11, 11-a, 12 and 18 of the land acquisition act and contended that the supreme court by its decision reported in harish chandra v. dy. land acquisition officer, : [1962]1scr676 and state of punjab v. qaisar jehan begum, : [1964]1scr971 have interpreted consistently the provisions of section 18(2)(b) of the ..... land acquisition act and have held that :'a literal and mechanical construction of the words 'six months from the date of the collector's ..... are 'shall make an award........ within a period of two years..'. in section 18 of the land acquisition act sub-clause 501-a the word used are :'if the person making it was present or represented before the collector at the time when he made his award or the amendment within six weeks from the date of the collector's award or the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 14 1988 (HC)

Banarsi Dass Vs. State of Haryana

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-14-1988

Reported in : AIR1989P& H154

..... the same keeping in view the doctrine of stare decisis and the amended provisions of the act, providing for those land owners who have not even filed references under section 18 of the act, to claim enhanced compensation from the land acquisition collector, on the basis of such enhancement on the references of other land owners, it transpires that no different yard stick can be adopted in ..... on lease with the forest department from the year 1945 to 1979 and it was declared protected area under the provisions of punjab land preservation act, 1900. he also conceded that the land owners used to cut trees on the said land with the permission of the forest department. he also tendered into evidence list exhibit p.w. 15/1 depicts the issuing of permits ..... 255 can be safely referred to in this regard. in the case in hand, the acquired land forms part of the morni hills which is admittedly semi hilly area where there is a wild growth of trees of different ..... the act. it is further settled that for arriving at the market value of the acquired land, the value of the forest trees or orchard growing thereon had to be taken into consideration. the decisions of the supreme court in niranjan singh v. state of u.p., air 1979 sc 1547 as well as in chaturbhuj pande v. collector, raigarh, air 1969 sc .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 17 1988 (HC)

Banta Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : May-17-1988

Reported in : AIR1988P& H308

..... and the sum of rs. 85,000/- , as claimed in the appeal as also the solatium and interest was directed to be paid.5. the land acquisition act, 1894 was amended by the land acquisition (amendment)act, 1984(act no. 68 of 1984). sub-section (2) of section 23 was amended by this amending act by providing 30 per centum solatium instead of 15 per centum. section l8, clause (a) of the ..... may be, apply to such reference as they apply to a reference under section 18.' the amending act gave retrospective operation to the amended provisions with effect from april 30, 1982, the date of introduction of the land acquisition (amendment) bill, 1982, in the house of the people. though the amending act was passed and published in the gazette on september 24, 1984, in view of the retrospective ..... :--'we are of the view that when the learned single judge and the division bench took the view that the claimants whose land was acquired by the state of punjab under the notification issued under ss. 4 and 6 of the act, were entitled to enhanced compensation and the case of the appellants stood on the same footing, the appellants should have been .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 13 1988 (HC)

Principal Secretary to Government Housing Municipal Administration and ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-13-1988

Reported in : AIR1989AP342

..... .e., either the date of the publication in the newspapers or the date of local publication whichever is later. if we keep the objects and reasons as mentioned in the land acquisition (amendment) act, 1984 (act 68 of 1984) in view, this interpretation of the provisions stands to scrutiny and does not result in any anomaly. in uday kaushik v ..... jayachandra reddy, j. 1. in these writ appeals, a question of general importance is raised namely, whether the amendment of section 4(1) of the land acquisition act by the central act 68 of 1984 and the a.p. amendment 9 of 1983 renders the publication of the notification in the newspapers mandatory and if so, whether such publication should be prior to causing public notice of ..... down under chap. vii has not been followed and therefore, the notification under section 4(1) is invalid. in jhandu lal v. state of punjab, : [1961]2scr459 it is observed (at p. 347) :'the declaration for the acquisition for a public purpose, similarly, cannot be made unless the compensation wholly or partly, is to be paid out of public funds.'11. in ..... a number of cases thai where the government agrees to contribute a part of compensation it becomes for public purpose. in jhandu lal v. state of punjab (supra), their lordships held that where the acquisition is made for public purpose the cost of compensation has to be paid wholly or partly out of public revenue or some fund controlled or managed by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 01 1988 (HC)

Des Raj Bansal (deceased by L.R.'s) Vs. State of Haryana and Anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Sep-01-1988

Reported in : AIR1989P& H240

..... but any improvement made in the status of the vendee by means of a voluntary acquisition of right in property made, after the institution of the suit, will not affect the right of a pre-emptor in the suit punjab act no. 1 of 1944 amended the punjab pre-emption act, 1913. the material words mentioned in the statement of objects and reasons, read thus : --'21 ..... is just possible thatif it was not so done, the municipal committeeor the improvement trust may have acquiredthat land for establishing a commercialcomplex. probably keeping that in mind, theinstitution built shops and rented out thesame to augment the income and to save itfrom acquisition by the muncipal committeeor other authorities for establishing acommercial complex. the object of runningsuch an institution to impart ..... notification is vitiated being suffering from legal mala fide. apart from this, we find that before the learned single judge what was submitted was that the college for which the land was purchased was owned by shri prem bal khera and the institution was not maintained by the dev samaj. the learned single judge after careful consideration of the case gave ..... pre-emptor, the suit must fail.'the following question was formulated and referred to the full bench : --'whether a vendee who has joined with him a stranger in purchasing agricultural land or immovable property can by acquiring the interest of the stranger co-vendee by gift or j sale successfully resist a suit for pre-emption in view of the provisions .....

Tag this Judgment!


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