Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the requisitioning and acquistion of immovable property rules 1953 Page 1 of about 1,544 results (0.078 seconds)

Dec 23 1983 (HC)

MawahedduddIn and ors. Vs. the Collector, Hyderabad

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1984AP217

..... under section 22(2)(c) of the act to the subordinate legislation to provide the principles to be followed in 'determining the amount of compensation'. though the requisitioning and acquisition of immoveable property rules, 1953, for short 'the rules' have been made, no principles were laid down. therefore the power of the arbitrator in determining the compensation 'to be just' is of wide amplitude and left ..... bearing survey nos. 352, 353/1, 354/1, 359/1, 355, 357 and 358 situated in shaikpet village, urban taluk, hyderabad district were initially requisitioned in the year 1963 under the provisions of the requisitions and acquisition of immoveable property act, 1952, hereinafter called 'the act'. subsequently, a notification acquiring them was published under section 7 of the act on march 4, 1970 for ..... requisitioning and acquisition act where the statue omitted to pay interest on the land to be acquired. the same contention as herein was raised before the supreme court. while considering that question, gajendragakar, j. (as he then was) speaking on behalf of the court has held in paragraph 17 at page 915 thus:'stated broadly the act of taking possession of immoveable property .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 2005 (HC)

Union of India (Uoi) Through Defence Estate Officer Vs. Seneth Munda @ ...

Court : Jharkhand

Reported in : AIR2005Jhar107; 2005(1)BLJR729; [2005(2)JCR7(Jhr)]

..... in the year 1989. according to the appellant, the respondents are, thus, not at all entitled either in law or in equity or under the provisions of rule 9 of requisitioning and acquisition of immovable properties rules, 1953 to make any further claim. it has been stated that the award is apparently illegal and unsustainable and the appellant has fair chance of success in the appeal ..... money decree and the same cannot be stayed. the appellant is duty bound to pay the awarded sum in view of section 9 and rule 10(6) of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act, 1952 and its rules of 1953. it has been stated that in similar type of cases, this court has directed the appellant to make payment of the awarded sum. it ..... , the payment of awarded amount shall be subject to the following conditions :--(i) the authority, concerned, shall release 50% of the awarded sum on furnishing a security bond of the immovable property of the equivalent value in favour of the president of india, to the satisfaction of the deputy commissioner, ranchi;(ii) the remaining 50% of the awarded amount shall be paid .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 1995 (SC)

Union of India and Others Vs. Ajaib Singh and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1996SC270a; [1995]Supp3SCR831

..... compensation between the respondents and the appellants and the compensation was actually paid to the respondents and the respondents duly accepted the compensation without any protest. under rule 9 of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property rules, 1953, the competent authority can pay compensation only after entering into an agreement in form-k. mr. goswami has contended that in the instant case, compensation was ..... the contention on behalf of the appellant will have to be upheld in the facts of this case. unlike the land acquisition act, there is no provision in the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act for payment of solatium and interest. solatium and interest have been awarded in the interest of justice in certain cases. but in the absence of special circumstances ..... , such award of interest and solatium cannot be justified under the provisions of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act.9. on behalf of the respondents, mr. r.c. pathak has drawn our attention to a judgment of this court in the case of union of ..... india v. hari krishan khosla (1992) 2 sc 621. this was also a case under requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act, 1952. the ultimate decision in this case goes against the contention of mr. pathak. in s.l.p. (c) no. 1780/1991, the award of 15% .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 01 2006 (SC)

Mahesh Lall Seal and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR2007SC357; 2006(3)ARBLR414(SC); 2006(4)AWC3583(SC); JT2006(8)SC434; 2006(8)SCALE768; (2006)10SCC227

..... claimants had received rs. 14,80,000/- out of rs. 18,98,000/- by executing agreement in form k under rule 9(5) of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property rules 1953 under protest; that various proceedings were initiated before the l.a. collector but determination could not be made under section 8 ..... acquired, was that the claimants had entered into agreement with the government on 18.7.75 for sale of properties under section 8(1)(a) of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1952 act') at a fixed price of rs. 18,98,000/- and ..... calcutta (hereinafter referred to as 'the acquired property'). the said acquired property was initially requisitioned by union of india under defence of india act and rules. this was on 22.4.1942. on 3.3.1987 the said property was acquired under the 1952 act along with other properties when form j was published. up to 31 ..... of land value + solatium for the period of one year from the date of acquisition on the basis that union of india shall pay the requisite amount within three months from the date of the award. however, union of india unnecessarily litigated on unstatable points, as stated above, and in ..... .12.74 the rent of the acquired property was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1990 (HC)

Attili Narayana Rao Vs. State of A.P., Rep. by District Collector Comp ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : 1991(1)ALT400

..... conferred under section 22 of the act.6. rule 10 (5) of the said rules reads as follows :-'10(5). when arbitrator has made his award he shall sign it and ..... : the amount of compensation payable under an award shall, subject to any rules made under this act, be paid by the competent authority to the person or persons entitled thereto in such manner and within such time as may be specified in the award.'5. the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property rules, 1953 have been framed by the central government in exercise of the powers ..... arbitrator-cum-district and sessions judge, visakhapatnam passed an award dated 10-3-1987 fixing the compensation at rs. 15/- per sq. yard for the lands acquired under the requisitioning and acquisition of immoveable property act, 1952 ('the act' for brevity). being dissatisfied with the said award of compensation, the claimant filed cma no. 1077 of 1987 in this court and a learned ..... amount as fixed by this court in the above cma and as there is no provision for depositing the amount by the competent authority either under the act or the rules made thereunder, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.3. sri s. venkateswara rao, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that since there is no forum available for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 07 1977 (HC)

Gobinda Lal Daga and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1977Cal182,81CWN474

..... to be followed in arbitration proceedings under this chapter. in pursuance thereof, the central government has framed rules called the defence of india (requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property) rules, 1962. under these rules, an arbitrator has been given certain powers of civil court by rule 12, rule 13 provides for making of the award by the arbitrator in writing. it further provides that the award ..... that government under the defence of india act, 1962, and the rules made thereunder (including any immovable property deemed to have been requisitioned under the said act) which has not been released from such requisition before the 10th january, 1968, shall, as from the date, be deemed to have been requisitioned by the competent authority under the provisions of this act for the ..... his order dated august 16, 1975 the application was dismissed as not maintainable. the learned judge held that in view of the provisions of section 25 of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act, 1952 (act xxx of 1952) which was inserted by an amendment act 31 of 1968, the provisions of the arbitration act did not apply to ..... where the amount thereof does not exceed an amount prescribed in this behalf by rule made by the central government section 11 of act 30 of 1953 provides for an appeal from the award of an arbitrator to the high court within whose jurisdiction the requisitioned or acquired property is situate. 10. it will thus be seen that the application of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 10 1972 (HC)

The Amritsar Central Co-operative Store Ltd. Vs. Ram Kishan Mehra and ...

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : AIR1973P& H342

..... 't' annexed to the writ petition. no action was taken since the application had been filed after the expiry of 30 days as is provided under rule 9 of the defence of india (requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property) rules, 1962. the application dated 31st october, 1965, referred to above, was rejected vide government's order annexed by the petitioners to the petition. (xiv) it ..... of the petitioners. this application was under the defence of india act, 1962, and did not relate to the compensation which had to be fixed under the punjab (requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property) act, 1953. it is also correct that in august 1969, the answering respondent was anxious to fix the compensation as was desired in the application dated 2nd july 1969, and ..... to him for his award.no reply was received to this application by the owners of the building because the district magistrate took proceedings for requisitioning the said property under the provisions of punjab requisition and acquisition of immovable property act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the punjab act). on july 13, 1966, a notice was issued by the district magistrate amritsar, being the competent authority .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 21 1971 (HC)

Mushtaq Ahmed Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : AIR1972Delhi20

..... thereforee is mandatory. 18. reference was then made by the learned counsel to clauses (vi). (vii) and (viii) of rule 7 of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property rules, 1953. rule 7 lays down the procedure to be followed in releasing the property and provides that for purposes of sub-section (2) of section 6 the competent authority, if it considered necessary so to do ..... that the order under this provision had to be in the prescribed form, according to sub-rule (3) rule 7 of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property rules, 1953 framed by the central government in exercise of the powers conferred by section 22 of the act. this sub-rule provides that order under sub-section (2) of section 6 had to be in the ..... prescribed form 'g' annexed to the rules. it was contended that because the letter in question was not in ..... writing with respondent no. 3 to lease out the property mentioned in the said agreement to him, on its being de-requisitioned. by order dated august 23,1965, the competent authority appointed under the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act (xxx of 1952) (hereafter called 'the act') released a part of the requisitioned property consisting of flat nos. 21,22,23,24 and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 1995 (SC)

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Ajaib Singh and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1996SC270; (1995)6SCC323

..... compensation between the respondents and the appellants and the compensation was actually paid to the respondents and the respondents duly accepted the compensation without any protest. under rule 9 of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property rules, 1953, the competent authority can pay compensation only after entering into an agreement in form-k. mr. goswami has contended that in the instant case, compensation was ..... the contention on behalf of the appellant will have to be upheld in the facts of this case. unlike the land acquisition act, there is no provision in the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act for payment of solatium and interest. solatium and interest have been awarded in the interest of justice in certain cases. but in the absence of special circumstances ..... , such award of interest and solatium cannot be justified under the provisions of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act.9. on behalf of the respondents, mr. r.c. pathak has drawn our attention to a judgment of this court in the case of union of ..... india v. hari krishan khosla, : 1992(2)scale621 . this was also a case under the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act, 1952. the ultimate decision in this case goes against the contention of mr. pathak. in s.l.p. (c) no. 1780/1991, the award of 15% .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 2019 (HC)

Rakesh Seksaria & Ors. Vs.the Union of India & Anr.

Court : Delhi

..... out by mr. sibal appearing for the state of punjab that section 6 (2) of the 1952 act uses the words as far as practicable.? rule 7 of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property rules, 1953 ( rules?), sets out the procedure to be followed by the competent authority for the purposes of exercising the powers under section 6 (2) of the 1952 act ..... . the factors required to be taken into consideration subsequent to the requisitioning include the change of ownership of the property. it is further submitted that there could ..... their capacity as his legal representatives. in terms of section 6 (1a) of the 1952 act, a property requisitioned thereunder before the commencement of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property (amendment) act, 1970, shall be released by the government of india from requisition on or before the expiry of a period of 17 years from such commencement.? in terms thereof, on ..... to the union of india and the ministry of urban development ( moud?) (respondent no.1) to derequisition the immovable property at no.3, man singh road, new delhi (hereafter the property in question?) under section 6 (2) of the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act, 1952 w.p.(c) 4256/2015 page 1 of 15 ( the 1952 act?) and hand over .....

Tag this Judgment!


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