Land Acquisition Archives - Page 4 of 25 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

February 2, 2026 7:46 am

Dismissal of the special leave petition in limine does not amount to affirmation of the view taken by the High Court. Unless the judgment of the High Court is affirmed, at least, with short reasoning, the same would not amount to binding precedent.

Apr 17, 2023 sclaw

“The State or its instrumentalities cannot be permitted to adopt an attitude of pick and choose.If the State has accepted the award of the Reference Court in respect of some…

Land Acquisition

Vedanta University case – Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 4(1) and 6 – Acquisition of lands – it is required to be noted that the lands to be acquired are agricultural lands belonging to 6000 families and their only source of livelihood is on the agricultural lands, which cannot be compensated in terms of money, therefore, the proposal made now has to be rejected outright.

Apr 16, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANIL AGARWAL FOUNDATION ETC. ETC. — Appellant Vs. STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah And Krishna Murari, JJ.…

Land Acquisition

Lapse of acquisition proceedings – Impugned judgments and orders passed by the High Court declaring that the acquisition with respect to the lands in question are deemed to have lapsed under section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 are hereby quashed and set aside – Matter remanded

Apr 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. (HSIIDC) & OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. — Respondent ( Before…

Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24(2) – Lapse of acquisition proceedings – In case possession has been taken, compensation has not been paid then there is no lapse – Similarly, if compensation has been paid, possession has not been taken then there is no lapse.

Apr 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LAND AND BUIILDING DEPARTMENT THROUGH SECRETARY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ATTRO DEVI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and…

Land Acquisition

Acquisition of land – Determination of compensation – If 60% rise to the negotiated price is given, the same can be said to be just compensation and which can be said to be a fair compensation

Apr 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJALAKSHMI — Appellant Vs. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) KOYILANDY AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. ) Civil…

Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24(2) – Once there shall be no deemed lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013, the original writ petitioner shall not be entitled to the compensation as per the Act, 2013.

Apr 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SUBHASH CHANDER KHATRI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T.…

Land Acquisition

Lapse of Acquisition proceedings – Appeal against – A subsequent purchaser has no locus to challenge the acquisition/lapsing of the acquisition –

Mar 26, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI — Appellant Vs. VIJAY GUPTA 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 – Section 24(2) – Lapse of Acquisition proceedings – In case possession has been taken, compensation has not been paid then there is no lapse – Similarly, if compensation has been paid, possession has not been taken then there is no lapse.

Mar 25, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. BATTI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Land Acquisition

HELD High Court has committed a very serious error in setting aside the consent award on the aforesaid ground. The consent award under Section 11 of the Act, 1894 ought not to have been set aside in the manner in which it is set aside. The High Court has not at all properly appreciated and considered the conduct on the part of the land owner

Mar 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. JAYANTIBHAI ISHWARBHAI PATEL — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Manoj Misra, JJ. ) Civil…

Land Acquisition

Applying the law laid down by this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal and Ors., (2020) 8 SCC 129 to the facts of the case on hand and more particularly, when even the original writ petitioner also admitted that the possession of the land in question was taken on 22.09.1997, there shall not be any deemed lapse under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 – Appeal allowed.

Mar 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA THROUGH LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR — Appellant Vs. RAJESH KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Manoj Misra,…

You missed

Bail Granted

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 108, 80, 103, 85 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3, 4 — Offences — Abetment to suicide, Dowry death, Murder — Allegations of extra-marital relationship, demand of money/dowry — Deceased died of poisoning/injection — Autopsy findings — Prosecution case not strong at bail stage.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 33(1) — Requirement for employer to seek permission before altering service conditions or stopping work of workmen during pendency of dispute — Failure to do so constitutes a breach of the Act.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Labour Cases

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Sections 10(1), 12 — Reference of industrial dispute — Apprehended dispute — Appropriate Government’s power to refer — The appropriate Government has the power to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication if it is of the opinion that such dispute exists or is apprehended. The initiation of conciliation proceedings under Section 12 does not statutorily require a prior demand notice to the employer as a pre-condition to approaching the Conciliation Officer. The management’s argument that a prior demand notice is essential, based on certain previous judgments, fails as it ignores the provision for referring an apprehended dispute, which can be invoked to prevent industrial unrest

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 175(4) — Complaints against public servants alleged to have committed offenses in discharge of official duties — Interpretation — This provision is not a standalone provision, nor is it a proviso to Section 175(3) — It must be read in harmony with Section 175(3), with Section 175(4) forming an extension of Section 175(3) — The power to order investigation under Section 175(3) is conferred upon a judicial magistrate, while Section 175(4) also confers such power but prescribes a special procedure for complaints against public servants — The expression “complaint” in Section 175(4) does not encompass oral complaints and must be understood in the context of a written complaint supported by an affidavit, as required by Section 175(3) — This interpretation ensures that the procedural safeguard of an affidavit, mandated by Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P., is not undermined even when dealing with public servants — The intention is to provide a two-tier protection: first, at the threshold stage under Section 175(4) with additional safeguards, and second, at the post-investigation stage under Section 218(1) regarding previous sanction. (Paras 26, 31, 37.1, 37.2, 37.4, 37.5, 37.6, 37.8, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44)

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Category: Land Acquisition

You missed