Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the punjab land improvement scheme act 1963 Page 1 of about 1,033 results (0.074 seconds)

Feb 06 1981 (HC)

Kartar Kaur and ors. Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1981P& H146

..... of t he act on november 1, 1963. later this scheme was sanctioned by the government in terms of section ..... 41 of the act and was duly notified on january 28, 1968 ..... reference, whenever necessary, to the facts and records of this case only.2. the improvement trust, ludhiana, (hereinafter referred to as the trust) framed a development scheme under section 24 read with section 28(2) of the punjab town improvement act, 1922, (hereinafter referred to as the act), regarding 17 acres of land near the jawahar camp and in this regard published a notice under s. 36 ..... . as required by section 42 of the act. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 17 1990 (HC)

Sanjai Gandhi Grah Nirman Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit Vs. State of M.P. a ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1991MP72

..... the petitioners because while interpreting the provisions of sections 4 and 24 of the punjab town improvement act, the supreme court has held that areas which were not included in the municipal limits cannot be included under a development scheme framed by that trust under an expansion scheme or a housing accommodation scheme. the power have to be exercised in accordance with the conditions laid down ..... plea has also been taken by some housing co-operative societies that as the government has granted them exemption under section 20 of the urban ceiling act therefore these lands could not be included in the scheme. in our opinion this objection is without any force for the simple reason that an exemption granted by government under section 20 of the urban ceiling ..... and in the newspapers. thereafter objections were received and the objections were decided by the indore development authority on 10-2-84. it was also decided that the land to be included in the scheme should also be specified in the notification in accordance with section 50(7) of the adhiniyam. thereupon a memo was sent to the collector, indore by the ..... . in this context we may also refer to the judgment of smt. somawati v. state, of punjab (air 1963 sc 151) wherein it has been held that when a declaration is made by the government under sub-section (3) of section 6 of the land acquisition act pertaining to public purpose, it is final except the person challenging it is able to show that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 23 1992 (HC)

Lakhwinder Singh Bajwa Vs. State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1992)101PLR602

..... 'the act'). it covered an area of about 70 acres. the scheme was approved by the state government in the year 1967. nine writ petitions, including c. w ..... as 'the trust') to acquire the land of the petitioners. commonality of questions of fact and law warrants disposal of these petitions by one judgment. the facts as given in c. w. p. no. 16161 of 1990 may be briefly noticed.2. in 1963, a development scheme was notified by the trust under section 36 of the punjab town improvement act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as ..... section 36 having lapsed due to non-sanction by the state government, the trust is competent to acquire the land. it has been further averred that the objections raised by different persons were duly considered and decided by the improvement trust before the scheme was sent to the state government for sanction. it has also been averred that the petitions suffer from delay ..... to this resolution, a notice under section 36 was published in the punjab government gazette of january 30, 1987. a copy of this notice is at annexure p-3. the state government, however, did not approve this scheme. as a result the second attempt of the trust to acquire the land in question failed.4. on april 6, 1989, the trust initiated its .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 1969 (HC)

Ajit Singh Vs. Smt. Subaghan and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1970P& H93

..... holdings has been dealt with and that section reads-'16-a (1):--notwithstanding anything contained in chapter ix of the punjab land revenue act, 1887, except section 117 thereof, the scheme prepared by the consolidation officer may provide for partition of land between joint-owners of land or between joint-tenants of a tenancy in which a right of occupancy subsists, in accordance with the share ..... should not be allowed, and (ii) that he would be put to much loss because he had made substantial improvements on the land he had purchased from ranjit singh co-sharer. he, therefore, sought amendment of the scheme under section 36 of east punjab act 50 of 1948. the settlement officer then proceeded to say that he found no reason to differ from his previous ..... legal nor bona fide and had to be quashed. the learned judge pointed out that 'the decision in pat rams case, civil writ no. 1641 of 1960, d/-18-10-1963 (punj), entirely covers the present petition and in this view it is clear that the director of consolidation had no jurisdiction to upset the order of the settlement officer directing ..... a specific portion of land which he has improved, the exception to this being a case where question of title is involved as was held in ram gopal v. state of punjab, 1965-67 pun lr 1102. the learned judge then proceeded to rely on pat ram v. state of punjab, civil writ no. 1641 of 1960, d/-18-10-1963 (punj), where it has .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 1974 (HC)

Lalit Behari Vs. Sant Lal

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1974P& H339

..... interpretation for the first time in panna lal's case (1963) 65 pun lr 528(supra) and the following observations were made by falshaw. c. j.,--'except for the fact that in the punjab act the words 'at ..... the tenant to put the landlord in possession-(iii) in the case of any building or rented land, if he requires it to carry out any building work at the instance of the government or local authority or any improvement trust under some improvement or development scheme or if it has become unsafe or unfit for human habitation.'the above provision came up for ..... 's case.7. having regard to the plain language of clause (3)(a)(iii) of section 13 of the punjab act, the only reasonable way its relevant provision can be read is as follows:--'in the case of any building or rented land................................................ if it has become unsafe or unfit for human habitation.to find support to the ratio of the decision in ..... consider that the matter was erroneously decided by the courts below and that under the provisions of section 13 of the punjab act the landlord can claim eviction of the tenant if he pleads that the building or the rented land has become unfit or unsafe for human habitation and it is not necessary for him to further plead or prove that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 1972 (SC)

NaraIn Das and ors. Vs. the Improvement Trust, Amritsar and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1972SC865; (1973)2SCC265; 1972(4)LC696(SC)

..... had also prayed in the high court that the improvement trust and land acquisition collector be restrained from acquiring and taking possession of the appellant's said land. the improvement trust, amritsar, framed a development scheme in 1961 under section 24 read with section 28(2) of the punjab towns improvement act, (no. iv), 1922 (hereinafter called the act). the scheme covered an area measuring approximately 128 acres within the ..... built up area abutting on mall road. the lay-out was formally approved by the senior planner and was finally approved by the trust on january 31, 1963. the scheme as finally approved provided for the development of the vast area which was mostly unbuilt and the locality was chosen to be developed mainly as a residential colony with two ..... for commercial purposes. the scheme was forwarded to the punjab state government on march, 5, 1963 : in the forwarding note all those facts were mentioned. the governor of punjab sanctioned the scheme on september 17, 1963 and the sanction was duly notified under section 42(1) of the act. pursuant to this scheme the government acquired the said 128 acres of land including the land belonging to the appellants. in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 1991 (HC)

Kanhaiyallal and 3 ors. Vs. the UjjaIn Vikas Pradhikaran, Dewas Rd., U ...

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1991MP290; 1994(0)MPLJ315

..... bradari v. chairman, amritsar improvement trust (air 1963 sc 976). smt. somwati v. the state of punjab (air 1963 sc 151) and narayan govind gavate etc. v. state of maharashtra(air 1977 sc 183), the learned counsel submitted that existence of a scheme is a sine qua non for land acquisition for the scheme. according to the learned ..... of about 5 years another notification dated 3-7-1985 under section 4 of the land acquisition act was published in the gazette of m.p. dated 2-8-1985 for acquiring lands, including the petitioners' land for the purpose of scheme no. 23 of the u.d.a. the petitioners filed objections to the acquisition ..... notification dated 22-7-86 under section 6 of the land acquisition act was published in the gazette of m.p. this notification is under challenge in this petition.6. the petitioners have also made a grievance ..... sent to the collector district ujjain, who accorded sanction to the acquisition on 22-7-86 and ordered that notice under section 6 of the land acquisition act be issued and published. the petitioners applied for copies of the report etc., which were not supplied to them and on 25-7-86 ..... , indore (1973 mplj 150) : (air 1973 mp 155). moreover, there is no alternative remedy so far as the challenge to the notification under the land acquisition act is concerned, there is, therefore, no force in the objection that the petition cannot be entertained on this ground. so far as the question of res .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 28 1967 (HC)

Sant Ram Vs. Mekh Lal and Co.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR1968Delhi299

..... described as the punjab act). the provision of law requiring interpretation may now be reproduced.'13. * * * * (iii) in the case of any building or rented land, if he requires it to carry out any building work at the instance of the government or local authority or any improvement trust under some improvement or development scheme or if it ..... single bench, one of us expressed his doubts in regard to the correctness of the approach of falshaw c. j. in panna lal's case, (1963) 65 plr 528 but did nto consider it necessary to go into the question on that occasion, because in the reported case, the requisite plea was ..... bench. dulat j., who prepared judgment on behalf of the division bench, after referring to the opinion of falshaw c. j. in panna lal's case, (1963) plr 528. expressed himself thus:-'this strikes me as an entirely reasonable view. mahajan, j., thought it unreasonable for two reasons. one was that the provision ..... 5. the petitioner's learned counsel has, however, sought support for his submission from the decision by falshaw c. j. in panna lal's case, (1963) 65 plr 528. it is perfectly true that the observations of the learned chief justice do lend support to the submission, but with all due respect, we ..... 67 of 1967), shri sushil malhtora and shri r. n. malhtora appearing in support of the petitioner sant ram cited before andley, j. panna lal v. jagan nath, 1963 p. l. r. 528, a decision by falshaw, c. j. and chuhar mal v. balak ram, 1964 cur lj 119 = (1964) 66 plr 503 (dulat .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 29 1997 (HC)

Baldev Singh and anr. Vs. the State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1998)118PLR579

..... the petitioners also claim that this scheme is also not in accordance with the rules of the punjab scheduled roads and controlled areas (restrictions of unregulated development) act, 1963, since the proposed scheme is within 50 metres of the scheduled roads. according to the petitioners, the respondent- trust had left 18.42 acres land wilfully to benefit certain land owners who are close relatives of ..... sides and perused the records. under the notification dated 1st september, 1993 made under section 36 of the punjab town improvement act, 1922, the bhatinda improvement trust framed a development scheme under sections 24 and 25 read with section 28(2) of the said act in respect of an area approximately measuring 49.5 acres situated within the municipal limits of bhatinda. the ..... under articles 226/227 of the constitution of india for quashing the notifications issued under sections 36, 40 and 42 of the punjab town improvement act, 1922 as also the subsequent proceedings initiated by the third respondent-land acquisition collector.2. by this order we dispose of this and the connected 31 writ petitions also in view of the common ..... of the existence of certain constructions. the petitioners have also produced copy of another letter dated 6th may, 1994 by the divisional town planner to the chairman of the improvement trust requesting that the 'a' class construction may be adjusted. the petitioners have also produced a copy of the letter of the executive engineer provincial division, b&r; .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 24 1994 (HC)

Mohinder Singh Vs. the State of Punjab and ors.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1994)107PLR692a

..... dated 13.5.1991 of the improvement trust, jalandhar to exempt the property of the petitioner from the development scheme for the truck stand covering an area measuring 74.9 acres on g.t. road bye-pass was violative of the punjab scheduled roads and controlled area act, 1963, according to which no structures can ..... to annul the resolution as the same was not in conformity with the punjab scheduled roads and controlled area act, 1963.5. faced with this situation, learned counsel for the .petitioner, on the strength of section 11a of the land acquisition act, contended that the acquisition itself is bad as the supplementary award was ..... order dated 4.1.1993, annexure p/12 whereby the state government, under section 72-b of the act annulled resolution no. 32 dated 13.5.1991 of the improvement trust vide which land of the petitioner had been decided to be exempted from acquisition.2. mr. sarin, counsel for the petitioner ..... of the petitioner. mr. sarin contended that the writ petition was withdrawn because the trust had assured the petitioner that his land would be exempted from acquisition and acting on the assurance of the trust, the writ petition was withdrawn. order dated 8.6.1991 vide which the writ petition ..... trees (fruit bearing) etc. was given on 6.5.1991 i.e. on the expiry of two years' period as a result of which land acquisition proceedings stood elapsed. the petitioner got this writ petition dismissed as withdrawn and the same was dismissed as such by the division bench on 8.6 .....

Tag this Judgment!


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