Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the land acquisition punjab amendment act 1969 Year: 2010 Page 1 of about 32 results (0.099 seconds)

Jun 21 2010 (HC)

Niranjan Singh Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Jun-21-2010

..... the constitution challenges notification dated 29.1.2009 (p-3), issued under section 4 read with section 17(2)(c) (punjab amendment) of the land acquisition act, 1894 (for brevity, 'the act'). as the record shows it was followed by notification under section 6 of the act which was issued on 25.5.2005 (published in the official gazette on 12.6.2009). a draft award for ..... the year 2002-03 (p-4). it has further been submitted that no public purpose for acquiring the land is involved and that no survey has been conducted prior to issuance of the impugned notification. the provision of section 17(2)(c) (punjab amendment)of the act has been invoked without application of independent mind and there is no urgency involved to acquire the ..... land in question by dispensing with requirement of filing of objections under section 5-a of the act. it has also been alleged that the impugned notification has not been ..... under section 4 read with section 17 of the act be issued as certain land is required to be added which may oblige the government to issue fresh notification along with publication in the newspaper. therefore, it was suggested that the process of land acquisition be undertaken afresh. apart from the additions and deletion the land in village prempur and himatpur for the purpose .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2010 (HC)

Smt.Osuri Venkata Subbamma and ors. Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer a ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-30-2010

..... )."what is the rule of appropriation in execution of money decrees? is the rule the same in the case of an award-decree under the land acquisition act or, is there anything in the land acquisition act, 1894 as amended by the land acquisition (amendment) act (68 of 1984) making that rule inapplicable or not wholly applicable? these are the questions that arise for consideration in these petitions for special leave ..... hon'ble supreme court answered the said question holding that the claimants are entitled to compensation and get interest on the aggregate amount including the solatium. a division bench of punjab and haryana high court in the case of state of haryana v. kailashwalti5 made the following statement of law in regard to the sound principles of interpretation."once it is ..... the notification under sec.4(1) of the act is on 04.02.1981 and award passed on 22.12.1983, the hon'ble supreme court made it clear ..... the act. thus, it is stated that the aforesaid judgment is applicable to the facts of the present case.18.the learned counsel for the appellants/claimants further relied on another judgment of a division bench of the hon'ble supreme court of india in the case of state of punjab v. harchal singh (dead) through lrs6 wherein the land acquired pursuant to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 2010 (SC)

Sarup Singh and anr. Vs. Union of India(Uoi) and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-25-2010

..... answer the aforesaid two issues which arise for our consideration, we need to point out that the land acquisition act, 1894 came to be amended by virtue of the amendment act 68 of 1984. the said amendment became effective from 24.09.1984. by the aforesaid amendment act of 68 of 1984, amendments were brought in to the provisions of section 23, in that provisions of sub-section 23 1 ..... award was passed on 11.06.1975. as against the award passed by the special land acquisition collector, bhatinda cantonment, a reference case was filed which was decided by the reference court on 31.07.1979. finally, the matter came to be decided by the high court of punjab & haryana. the high court by an order dated 08.12.1982, determined the market ..... then is whether the high court has power to entertain independent applications under sections 151 and 152 and enhance solatium and interest as amended under act 68 of 1984. this controversy is no longer res integra. in state of punjab v. jagir singh and also in a catena of decisions following thereafter in union of india v. pratap kaur; state of maharashtra v ..... and grant interest not granted in the decree as submitted by the counsel appearing for the appellants in the light of the decision rendered by this court in state of punjab & others v. krishan dayal sharma reported in air 1990 sc 2177.19. but, if a decree is found to be nullity, the same could be challenged and interfered with at .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 10 2010 (HC)

Smt Susheelamma and ors Vs. the State of Karnataka and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Nov-10-2010

..... the supreme court with regard to the acquisition of lands for house building cooperative society. the supreme court in hmt house building co.op society v. syed khader held as under:"20. now the question which is to he answered is as to whether in view of the definition of "public purpose" introduced by the aforesaid amending act 68 of 1984 in section 3 ..... ) air 1992 punjab and haryana 295 jaswant singh vs. state of haryanavi) air 1981 sc 866 gen.govt.servants co.op.housimg society v. wahab uddinvii) 2010 (254) e.l.t.6 (s.c.) asstt.commr., commercial tax department v. shukla & brothers.viii) 2009 vol 111(1) bom.l.r.0016 harakchand mi grim a l solanki vs. the collector, land acquisition, puneix ..... under section 16(2) of the act, the subsequent retention of possession would tantamount only to illegal or unlawful possession. on the other hand, learned counsel for petitioners contend ..... case.10. respondents contend that they have taken possession of the lands in question under a notification dated 18.06.1998 issued under section 16(2) of the act as per annexure-m'. relying on a judgment of 'he supreme court in balmorand khatri educational and industrial trust vs state of punjab 1996(4) scc 212 it is contended that after taking permission .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 2010 (HC)

Akshat Commercial Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Kalpana Chakraborty and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Apr-30-2010

..... is to be dealt with from the stage at which it was so transferred and shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the wblra, as amended by the west bengal land reforms (amendment) act, 1972. it was submitted that it is clear therefore that the application before the munsif is nothing but the same application or nature of application before the ..... . the supreme court held that article 137 was not confined to applications under the code. this ratio has in fact been followed in several decisions e.g. the additional special land acquisition officer v. thanboredas : air 1994 sc 2227.46. in this background and coming more specifically to proceedings under section 8 of the wblra, it is not in dispute that it ..... ors. : 1996 (7) scc 507]. it appears from prem singh and ors. v. joginder singh and ors. : 1997 (10) scc 195 that the right of pre-emption under the punjab pre-emption act, 1913 is to be filed by making an application for pre-emption. significantly holding that the right of pre-emption in favour of kingsfolk was unconstitutional in atamprakash v ..... lordships disagreed with the view taken by the two-judge bench of that court in athani municipal council case reported in : (1969) 1 scc 873 and held that article 137 of the 1963 limitation act was not confined to applications contemplated by or under the code of civil procedure. in the case before us, specific period of limitation is fixed in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2010 (SC)

Amarinder Singh Vs. Special Committee, Punjab Vidhan Sabha and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-26-2010

..... , and, until so defined, shall be those of that house and of its members and committees immediately before the coming into force of section 26 of the constitution (forty- fourth amendment) act, 1978. (4) the provisions of clauses (1), (2) and (3) shall apply in relation to persons who by virtue of this constitution have the right to speak in, ..... openly worded and prescribe that the powers, privileges and immunities available to the legislature are those which were available at the time of the enactment of the constitution (forty-fourth) amendment act, 1978. subhash c. kashyap has elaborated on the indian position with these words [in parliamentary procedure - the law, privileges, practice and precedents, vol. 2 (new delhi, universal law ..... 10 acres) from a pool of 187 acres of land that had been notified for acquisition by the amritsar land improvement trust on 5-12-2003. the amritsar land improvement trust is a statutory body which had notified the plan for acquisition in pursuance of a developmental scheme, as contemplated under section 36 of the punjab land improvement act, 1922. earlier, on 23-6-2003, a private ..... :51. adverting to the effect of dissolution on other business such as motions, resolutions etc. the learned authors say:all other business pending in lok sabha e.g. motions, amendments, supplementary demands for grants etc., at whatever stage, lapses upon dissolution, as also the petitions presented to the house which stand referred to the committee on petitions. 44. on .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 2010 (HC)

Sudarshan Gochhayat. Vs. State of OrissA.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Nov-16-2010

..... . 29. learned senior counsel for the petitioner mr. jayant das further contends that land acquisition (companies) rules, 1963 is framed pursuant to the amendment of section 4 (1) of the act by act 38 of 1923 as acquisition of lands in favour of company is as provided under chapter vii of the l.a. act read with the above rules. therefore, the procedure contemplated under rule 4 should ..... . observed that fraud vitiates all transactions known to the law of however high a degree of solemnity (p. 722). (emphasis made by this court ) in gurdial singh v. state of punjab, air 1980 sc 319, the apex court held as under: 9. the question, then, is what is mala fides in the jurisprudence of power? legal malice is gibberish unless juristic ..... advocate general and senior counsel for the company upon the decisions of the apex court in the case of vijay cotton & oil mills ltd. v. state of gujarat, reported in (1969) 2 scr 60, in the case of state of rajasthan & ors. vrs. d.r. laxmi & ors., reported in (1996) 6 scc 445 and in the case of swaika properties (p ..... of the supreme court in the case of vijay cotton & oil mills ltd. v. state of gujarat, 1969 (2) scr 60, learned senior counsel further submits that the procedure to be followed by the district collector under section 5-a of the l.a. act after publishing the preliminary notifications is not mandatory in law. it is further contended that all the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 16 2010 (HC)

Jayaram SwaIn and ors.Vs. State of OrissA.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Nov-16-2010

..... . 29. learned senior counsel for the petitioner mr. jayant das further contends that land acquisition (companies) rules, 1963 is framed pursuant to the amendment of section 4 (1) of the act by act 38 of 1923 as acquisition of lands in favour of company is as provided under chapter vii of the l.a. act read with the above rules. therefore, the procedure contemplated under rule 4 should ..... . observed that fraud vitiates all transactions known to the law of however high a degree of solemnity (p. 722). (emphasis made by this court ) in gurdial singh v. state of punjab, air 1980 sc 319, the apex court held as under: 9. the question, then, is what is mala fides in the jurisprudence of power? legal malice is gibberish unless juristic ..... advocate general and senior counsel for the company upon the decisions of the apex court in the case of vijay cotton & oil mills ltd. v. state of gujarat, reported in (1969) 2 scr 60, in the case of state of rajasthan & ors. vrs. d.r. laxmi & ors., reported in (1996) 6 scc 445 and in the case of swaika properties (p ..... of the supreme court in the case of vijay cotton & oil mills ltd. v. state of gujarat, 1969 (2) scr 60, learned senior counsel further submits that the procedure to be followed by the district collector under section 5-a of the l.a. act after publishing the preliminary notifications is not mandatory in law. it is further contended that all the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2010 (HC)

Onkar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Haryana and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Decided on : Apr-20-2010

..... haryana state industrial and infrastructure development corporation (hsiidc). on 29.12.2006, a declaration under section 6 of the 1894 act was made by the land acquisition collector acquiring total land measuring 274 acres 4 kanals and 16 marlas including 154 acres 1 kanal 15 marlas of land pertaining to village dhakola (p-2).3. after issuance of notices under section 9 of the 1894 ..... record of village dhakola. on 23.12.2005, a notification under section 4 of the land acquisition act, 1894 (for brevity, 'the 1894 act') was issued proposing to acquire total land measuring 278 acres 1 kanal and 1 marla [out of which 154 acres 5 kanals and 6 marlas of land was falling within the revenue estate of village dhakola] for a public purpose, namely, for ..... is considered to be true, they have the rights as mushtarka malkan. therefore, until and unless their respective shares are determined, the compensation cannot be disbursed amongst them.5. the land acquisition collector-respondent no. 2 has filed his short written statement and has also placed reliance on the jamabandi for the year 2002-03, in support of the submission that the ..... proprietory body of the village dhakola, which is not being used for village common purposes. in the year 1992 an amendment was made in section 2(g), section 7 and 13-b of the punjab village common lands (regulation) act, 1961 (for brevity, 'the act'). the matter was considered by a full bench of this court in jai singh's case (supra) and in para .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 15 2010 (HC)

Sulaiman Vs. State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Mar-15-2010

Reported in : 2010(2)KLT49

..... p1 notification, is a public purpose or not.19. public purpose has been given an inclusive definition in section 3(f) of the land acquisition act. this means the legislature wanted to ensure maximum flexibility while incorporating the said provision. the concept of public purpose is bound to vary ..... stated that if the 6th respondent was amenable to the above suggestion, the respondents were ready to proceed with the acquisition invoking section 17(4) of the land acquisition act and compensate the 6th respondent. ext.p8 is a further statement incorporating more details of the proposal referred to above.4 ..... punjab and ors. (2008) 1 scc 728, where it was held that if the acquisition made is not relatable to public purpose, then a question may well arise whether in making declaration, on the part of the government there has been a fraud on the power conferred on it under the land acquisition act ..... institutions shall lapse at the end of such period, provided the statues under which the acquisitions have been commenced have not been duty amended and that if they are duly amended, the amounts payable for such acquisitions shall be determined thereunder.15. even as on date, a law as contemplated under ..... is the counter affidavit filed by the respondents. subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, the 6th respondent got the writ petition amended and contended that the school was a linguistic minority educational institution and therefore in view of the apex court judgment in society of st. .....

Tag this Judgment!


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