Supreme Court of India Judgements

47060 Judgements hosted as on 22/02/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 4 and 18 – Land acquisition – Compensation – Determination of market value – High Court has erred in law in holding that since the land of the sale exemplars is of irrigated agricultural land whereas the land acquired is unirrigated, is not the reasonable yardstick to determine market value of the land as the land in question is close to already developed area – Appeal allowed.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MADHUKAR S/O GOVINDRAO KAMBLE AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. VIDARBHA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V.…

Land Acquisition

Whether the Award passed by a Lok Adalat under Section 20 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 can form the basis for redetermination of compensation as contemplated under Section 28A of the the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Held, An application under Section 28A of the Act cannot be maintained on the basis of an award passed by the Lok Adalat under Section 20 of 1987 Act

Feb 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (NOIDA) — Appellant Vs. YUNUS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been incorporated into the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 -HELD High Court erred in holding that in view of the repeal of LA Act by coming into force of 2013 Act, the corresponding provisions of 2013 Act would regulate acquisition proceedings under the BDA Act and that this would include determination of compensation in accordance with 2013 Act

Jan 23, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Sanjiv…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 48(1) – Acquisition – Housing and development – Release of land – A notification under Section 48(1) does not warrant any notice or opportunity of hearing, to the original land owners – If at all any person will be aggrieved by the Notification under Section 48(1), it will be the beneficiary of the acquisition, which in this case is the Parishad, and not the land owners – Therefore, This Court can understand if the Parishad makes out a grievance that their rights were taken away by the notification under Section 48(1)

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD THROUGH HOUSING COMMISSIONER AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. NOOR MOHAMMAD AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 18(1) – Fixation of market value – Reference to Court – Fixation of market value in a Reference under Section 18(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 necessarily involves some guesswork – Guesswork is required to be made by adopting one of the well-recognized methods, such as the comparison method or capitalization method.

Dec 12, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SOMAN — Appellant Vs. INLAND WATERWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. )…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 18 – Acquisition of Land – Compensation – Suppression of material facts -appellants have not disclosed the filing of the suit and its dismissal and also the dismissal of the appeal against the judgment of the civil court, the appellants have to be non-suited on the ground of suppression of material facts – They have not come to the court with clean hands and they have also abused the process of law – Therefore, they are not entitled for the extraordinary, equitable and discretionary relief.

Dec 12, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRI K. JAYARAM AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari,…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 4 and 18 – Land Acquisition – Determination of Market Value/Compensation – HELD The judgment and award passed by the Reference Court in that case determining the market value/compensation at Rs.15,402/- per acre has attained the finality and the State has accepted the same by withdrawing the appeal against the said judgment and award – Therefore, in the present circumstances, the appellants shall be entitled to the compensation at Rs.15,402/- per acre – Appeal allowed.

Nov 28, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANIL KUMAR SOTI AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. THROUGH COLLECTOR BIJNORE (U.P.) — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 5A and 17(4) – Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 106 – Special powers in cases of urgency – HELD On an appreciation of the evidence made available by all the parties it is open to the court to conclude that no occasion arose for resorting to the power under Section 17 (4) which indeed must be read as an exception to the general rule that the acquisition of property is made after affording an opportunity the person adversely affected to demonstrate that the acquisition was unjustified.

Nov 28, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HAMID ALI KHAN (D) THROUGH LRS. AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph and…

Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24(1)(a) – Interpretation of -where proceedings for acquisition had been initiated under the 1894 Act but no award under Section 11 of the 1894 Act had been made, the provisions of the 2013 Act would apply limited to determination of compensation. Where, however, an award had been made under the 1894 Act, clause (b) to Section 24(1) protects the vested rights of the parties (

Nov 10, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, GOSIKHURD PROJECT AMBADI, BHANDARA, MAHARASHTRA VIDARBHA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — Appellant Vs. MAHESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M.…

You missed

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 14, Section 238 — Telecom laws — Spectrum — Nature of — Can spectrum, even if treated as an asset in corporate debtor’s books, be subjected to proceedings under IBC? — Held, No. Spectrum is a natural resource, the right to use which is granted by the Government under a licence, not ownership. The IBC cannot override the specific statutory regime governing telecommunications law.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw
Constitution

. Cricket Association Rules — Applicability of Supreme Court Judgments — A district cricket association’s rules and bye-laws are not necessarily required to be identical to those of the national cricket governing body (BCCI) based on previous Supreme Court judgments, as the specific rulings in those cases did not mandate such precise conformity for district associations.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw
Service

Service Law — Regularisation of Services — Casual Workers — Supreme Court held that casual workers who were similarly situated to those whose services had been regularised in previous judgments, should also have their services regularised. The Court noted that the work performed was perennial and fundamental to the functioning of the department, and that excluding these workers amounted to discrimination.

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw
Bail Declined

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 438 — Anticipatory Bail — Absconding accused — General rule is that an absconder is not entitled to anticipatory bail, exception being when court is prima facie satisfied that no case is made out against the accused after perusing FIR, case diary, and other materials — Accused absconded for almost six and a half years, threatened victim, had criminal antecedents, and was not traceable — Acquittal of co-accused does not automatically entitle absconding accused to anticipatory bail, as prosecution is not expected to adduce evidence against absconding accused during trial of co-accused — Granting anticipatory bail to an absconding accused sets a bad precedent

Feb 22, 2026 sclaw