Supreme Court of India Judgements

37260 Judgements hosted as on 04/06/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition

Compensation – Claimants shall not be entitled to the same compensation as awarded with respect to the lands acquired after 5 years from the date of acquisition – High Court awarding compensation @ Rs.297/- per sq.yard is unsustainable and it is held that the original claimants shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.120/- per sq.yard.

Dec 18, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. OMVIR SINGH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah and Hima Kohli, JJ.…

Land Acquisition

Disagree view taken by the High Court that the acquisition is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 on the ground that though the possession of the subject lands has been taken over but the compensation in respect of the subject lands has not been tendered.

Dec 18, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. CHANDERMAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24(2) – Lapse of acquisition proceedings – Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 twin conditions of not taking possession and not tendering/payment of compensation are required to be satisfied – If one of the conditions is not satisfied, the acquisition proceedings are not deemed to have been lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.

Dec 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. MEHDI HASAN (DECEASED) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.…

Land Acquisition

Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183 overruled subsequently by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority versus Manoharlal and others, (2020) 8 SCC 129 – Appeal allowed HC order set aside

Dec 11, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR (SOUTH EAST) — Appellant Vs. DHARAMVIR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. ) Civil…

Land Acquisition

High Court has allowed the writ petition and has declared that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under subsection (2) of Section 24 of the Act, 2013 solely on the ground that the compensation was not actually paid to the land owners- Appeal allowed

Dec 11, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. RAJ SINGH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Land Acquisition

Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183 overruled by Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and Ors., (2020) 8 SCC 129 HELD The deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act takes place where due to inaction of authorities for five years or more prior to commencement of the said Act,

Dec 4, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI — Appellant Vs. SUBHASH JAIN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. )…

Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – The obligation to pay is complete by tendering the amount under Section 31(1). The landowners who had refused to accept compensation or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

Dec 4, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR (SOUTH), NEW DELHI AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SURESH B. KAPUR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – The mode of taking possession under the 1894 Act and as contemplated under Section 24(2) is by drawing of inquest report/memorandum. Once award has been passed on taking possession under Section 16 of the 1894 Act, the land vests in State there is no divesting provided under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, as once possession has been taken there is no lapse under Section 24(2).

Dec 4, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI — Appellant Vs. KRISHNA SAINI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. )…

You missed

Service

Service Law — Promotion — Entitlement to promotion to Chief Medical Director (Higher Administrative Grade) in Indian Railway Medical Service — Appellant was denied promotion despite being eligible, with a junior officer being promoted instead — Appellant’s case was rejected by the Tribunal and High Court based on her grading in Annual Confidential Reports

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 29A — Mandate of Arbitrator — Extension of mandate — In the absence of specific statutory provisions, party autonomy and minimal judicial intervention are guiding principles — If a party participates in proceedings and does not object to the extension of mandate, they may be estopped from challenging the award on that ground after it is passed.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) — Section 33 and Section 34(3) — Limitation for filing application to set aside arbitral award — Exclusion of time spent in disposal of applications under Section 33 — Court held that period spent in disposal of Section 33 applications by Arbitral Tribunal must be excluded for computing limitation under Section 34(3) of the Act, regardless of whether the Section 33 applications were ultimately allowed or dismissed.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw
Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 14, 15(1), 16, 39(a) & 39(c) — Uttar Pradesh Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution Control) Order, 2016 (2016 Order) — Clause 2(p) — Government Order (G.O.) No — 6 of 2019 — Paragraph IV(10) — Exclusion of married daughter from definition of ‘family’ for compassionate appointment as fair price shop dealer — Held, exclusion is based on gender stereotypes and lacks rational nexus with the object of the scheme, violating Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution — Marital status cannot be the sole criterion for dependency — Dependency is a question of fact.

Jun 4, 2026 sclaw