Category: State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 – Section – 3(7) – Judicial separation – The claim made by learned Senior Counsel for the appellants, is that a wife who had separated in property from her husband, shall be treated to be a judicially separated wife for the purposes of Section 3(7) of the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960

  (1998) 7 JT 237 : (1998) 9 SCC 186 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SAROJ BHARDWAJ (SMT) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND OTHERS — Respondent (…

Land and Property Law—Whether having regard to notification vis-a-vis the expansion of the Indore development plan, the district committee in exercise of its delegated power can automatically extend the area of operation of the appellant despite the notification constituting it by the state whereby and whereunder its area of operation was limited to the one covered by the notification? NO.

2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3105 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 2530 of 2007…

Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 – Section – 85(8) – Delay in filling the application under section 85(8) – Appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Kerala affirming the order of the Taluk Land Board dismissing the application of the appellants filed under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act as barred by time

(1998) 9 JT 499 : (1997) 11 SCC 256 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ALIPARAMBA MOHAMMED AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. TALUK LAND BOARD AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before :…

Whether an application under Section 416 of the Act could at all be maintained by a person in whose favour there was only an agreement for sale and who had not acquired the title – Writ petition filed in the High Court was not confined to raising dispute between private parties. There was essentially an element of public interest involved as serious questions alleging violations of building laws and the town planning were raised – Appeal allowed.

  (2005) 12 SCC 317 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DEBASHIS ROY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. CALCUTTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R.C. Lahoti, C.J.; H.K.…

You missed