Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
6 judgments · newest first · showing 1–6
The Government of NCT of Delhi appealed against a Delhi High Court order that had allowed a writ petition filed by Ravinder Kumar Jain, who purchased land in 2003, invoking Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 …
The Delhi Development Authority appealed against a Delhi High Court order that declared the land acquisition proceedings against the petitioners had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The DDA …
The Supreme Court examined the meaning of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. The case involved land notified for acquisition in 1961, an award made in 1997, possession taken in 2000, and compensation that …
The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) sought compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, while the original landowners had filed claims for Rs.4,000 per square yard. During the proceedings the landowners executed assignment deeds transferring their compensation rights to …
The Supreme Court examined whether a ministerial note dated 8 June 1999 could be treated as a decision under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to withdraw from the acquisition of land occupied by Shanti Sports Club, and whether the Government’s refusal to de‑notify the land (letter …
The appellants purchased land that had been notified for acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and claimed that they had obtained prior permission under Section 5 of the Delhi Lands (Restrictions on Transfer) Act, 1972, to transfer the land. The High Court dismissed their review and writ …
