Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition

Incremental value of land from admitted or proved exemplars till the acquisition is evident – CLU certificate discharges the initial burden of establishing that the land under acquisition is not agricultural land – Therefore, apply the standard deduction 1/3 on exemplar value and are not persuaded to factor incremental increase on the exemplar – Market value of the lands Increased – Appeals allowed in part.

Aug 27, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BESCO LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Land Acquisition

HELD the consent terms and the directions of High Court were silent as to within what period the appellant had to make such an application, it was required to be construed that appellant had to make application after it received the compensation awarded under Section 11 and after it handed over possession of the lands, which it did. Appeal allowed

Aug 27, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRI NASHIK PANCHAVATI PANJARPOL TRUST AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE CHAIRMAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Dipankar…

Land Acquisition

Percentage of deduction or the extent of area required to be set apart has to be assessed by the courts having regard to the size, shape, situation, user etc. of the lands acquired – It is essentially a kind of guess work the courts are expected to undertake – A cut of one third was required to be imposed on the amount of compensation awarded by it – Assessment of market value so determined does not warrant any interference – Appeal dismissed.

Aug 23, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MALA ETC. ETC. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Dipankar Datta,…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition – Percentage of deduction or the extent of area required to be set apart has to be assessed by the courts having regard to the size, shape, situation, user etc. of the lands acquired – It is essentially a kind of guess work the courts are expected to undertake – A cut of one third was required to be imposed on the amount of compensation awarded by it

Aug 18, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  MALA ETC. ETC. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Dipankar Datta,…

Land Acquisition

HELD appellants cannot be worse off than the other affected landowners of the same village, i.e., Morlipura, who have been paid more compensation. In a welfare state like ours where we have promised all the citizens social and economic justice, it would be fair and just if the appellants are meted equal treatment as the other affected landowners

Aug 17, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KALUBHAI KHATUBHAI ETC. ETC. — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT & OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Bela M. Trivedi and Dipankar Datta, JJ.…

Land Acquisition

Once the acquisition under Land Acquisition Act 1894 continues to be valid, the claimant is disentitled to claim compensation in terms of the Right to Fair Compensation Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 which was not applicable to the acquisition.

Jul 20, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. JAGAN SINGH & OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Civil…

Land Acquisition National Highways Authority Act

National Highways Authority Act, 1956 – Section 3H – When it comes to resolving the dispute relating to apportionment of the amount determined towards compensation, it is only the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction which can do so – Principal Civil Court means the Court of the District Judge.

Jul 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINOD KUMAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MAU AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 4 – Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24(2) – Subsequent buyer of the property after issuance of the notification under Section 4 the 1894 Act has no locus to invoke Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

May 28, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI — Appellant Vs. RAVINDER KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal,…

Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24(2) – Lapse of acquisition proceedings – Subsequent purchaser has no locus to challenge the acquisition and/or pray for deemed lapse of acquisition.

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Civil…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw