Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
2126 judgments · newest first · showing 601–800
The petitioners, who were co‑owners of certain lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, alleged that they received no compensation for Survey Nos. 240 and 241 and that the compensation for Survey Nos. 4 and 169 was improperly allotted to the respondents. They applied to the Deputy …
The Central Railway’s acquisition of land in Hanumantwadi village for a broad‑gauge line led to compensation awards under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The award dated 07‑02‑2008 set compensation at Rs.1,170‑1,420 per square foot, which claimants contested, seeking Rs.50 per sq. ft., later …
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment of the Reference Court which had re‑classified land acquired for Percolation Tank No. 4 as irrigated and enhanced compensation from Rs 710 per R to Rs 4,000 per R, also awarding interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act. The State …
The claimants' houses in village Rui, Latur district were acquired for the Udharva Manyar Project under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer initially paid Rs 35 per square metre, but the Land Reference Court increased it to Rs 110 per square metre. The claimants …
The High Court heard multiple appeals challenging the compensation awarded for lands acquired for the Wadala Tank project. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had initially fixed compensation at Rs 150‑225 per R, which the reference court enhanced to Rs 940 per R. The acquiring body argued that the …
The appellants challenged awards of compensation granted by the State of Maharashtra for land acquired for the Sina‑Kolegaon Medium Project, alleging that the reference courts failed to treat a 1994 sale (Exhibit 19) as a comparable sale and that the land in one appeal was irrigated, warranting …
The claimants appealed the awards of the Land Reference Court concerning the acquisition of their lands for two percolation tanks in Latur district. They argued that the court had incorrectly applied an aggregate method for compensation despite the existence of sale exemplars, and that the lands …
The High Court of Bombay, Aurangabad bench heard a massive group of appeals arising from a common land acquisition proceeding for a minor irrigation project in Latur, where 104 hectares were acquired from several villages. Claimants challenged the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition …
The appellants' lands were acquired in 2005 for village rehabilitation and a compensation of Rs 1,87,000 per hectare was awarded, later enhanced to Rs 2,70,000 per hectare by the reference court. Dissatisfied, the claimants appealed, relying on an earlier award (LAR No. 150/2013) for the same Gat …
The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal against a judgment dated 20 June 2015 that enhanced compensation for land acquired for the Nagar Bypass Road, arguing that the land should have been treated as agricultural because it was shown in the Green Zone of the Urban Development Plan. The State sought …
The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired in 2005 for the Upper Tapi Project, arguing that a later award in the same village (LAR No.150/2013) granted a higher rate of Rs 100 per square metre. The original award was Rs 1,87,000 per hectare, later enhanced to Rs 2,70,000 …
The Union of India, acting through the Central Railway, acquired land in Loni Syed Mir village for a new railway line and the Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs 860‑1000 per R. The Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs 2,047 per R, treating the land as dry land, and also …
The appellants challenged the award of Rs. 2,400 per are for land acquired for the Nimna Dudhna Project, contending that the land is irrigated and should attract Rs. 5,500 per are with escalation. They also disputed the compensation awarded for various fruit‑bearing trees, arguing that the private …
The appellant's land in Wahegaon Sopara, Jalna district was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a percolation tank, with an initial compensation of Rs.1,545 per R, later enhanced to Rs.3,500 per R by a reference court. The appellant challenged this award, arguing that a previous First …
The appellant's land in Wahegaon Sopara, Jalna district was acquired under a 2008 notification for a percolation tank, with an initial compensation of Rs.1,545 per R fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer. The appellant challenged this award, and a reference court raised the compensation to Rs.5,250 …
The case concerns the acquisition of land for the Narwatwadi Storage Tank under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded compensation based on a pre‑notification sale (Exhibit 21) and the reference court enhanced the award to Rs.1,40,000 per …
The GMIDC, as the acquiring authority, appealed a reference court award that enhanced compensation for land acquired for the Narwatwadi Storage Tank. The land was taken under a Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with possession taken in 1994 and the award declared later. The …
The acquiring body, Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation, appealed a 2012 award of compensation in a land acquisition matter. The claimant, Limbrij Gundappa Todkari, filed a cross‑objection after a delay of 1,814 days, seeking enhanced compensation for his dry land. The Court …
The applicants, who are the original claimants in a land acquisition reference (L.A.R. No.329 of 2010), filed a First Appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 06.02.2014 passed by the Reference Court, Jalna, seeking enhancement of compensation. The appeal was filed with a delay of 3115 days, …
The appeal concerned lands acquired from a village for the MIDC Dhule project, originally awarded compensation in 2005 and 2011. The claimants argued that the matter was identical to a prior decision (FA No. 1210/12) and sought a higher market value and statutory benefits. The Court accepted that …
The Maharashtra Krushna Valley Development Corporation (the acquiring body) appealed against a judgment and award dated 17 June 2013 that enhanced compensation for land acquired for a storage tank project in Wadgaon (Dev.), Osmanabad. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had initially valued the …
The appellant, Chavalibai Mulchand Rathod, appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking enhanced compensation for fruit‑bearing trees on land acquired for the Minor Irrigation Tank Londhari Project. The reference court had determined compensation for the land but rejected the …
The case involved multiple first appeals and cross‑objections arising from land acquisition proceedings for the Urdhva Pravara Project in villages Mehenduri and Bahirwadi, where claimants sought higher compensation and the acquiring body contested interest. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had …
The High Court of Bombay heard a batch of first appeals and cross‑objections arising from land acquisition proceedings for the Urdhva Pravara Project canals in Ahmednagar district. Claimants sought further enhancement of the market value of their lands beyond the awards of the Reference Court, while …
The High Court of Bombay heard a batch of first appeals and cross‑objections arising from land acquisition awards for the Urdhva Pravara Project canals in villages Mehenduri and Bahirwadi. Claimants sought further enhancement of the market value of the acquired lands, while the acquiring body …
The Union of India, as the acquiring authority, sought to acquire land in Arvi village for the expansion of a broad‑gauge railway line. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs.127 per square metre, which the reference court enhanced to Rs.70 per square foot. The original …
The GMIDC and the Executive Engineer, Latur filed appeals against a reference court award that enhanced compensation for land acquired for the Narwatwadi Storage Tank. The land was taken under a Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in 1996, with possession taken in 1994 through …
The Gujarat Minor Irrigation Development Corporation (GMIDC) appealed the award of compensation granted to the original claimants whose lands were acquired for the Narwatwadi Storage Tank under a Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The reference court had enhanced the …
The Executive Engineer filed a writ petition challenging a 06‑10‑2023 order of the CJSD, Paranda that issued a warrant against the judgment debtor. The petitioner had deposited the entire award amount except for interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the interest component …
The High Court of Bombay heard a batch of first appeals and cross‑objections arising from land acquisition proceedings for the Urdhva Pravara Project canals in Ahmednagar district. Claimants sought a further increase in the market value of the acquired lands beyond the awards of the Reference Court, …
The appellant, Shanta Premkumarji Loya, appealed against the award of compensation for 2 R of land acquired for a JNNURM housing scheme, contending that the valuation and the 70% deduction for development charges were excessive. The trial court had fixed the land value at Rs 2,25,000 per R but …
The Union of India, acting through the Central Railway, acquired land in Raghapur village, Beed district, for a new railway line and paid a compensation rate of Rs 1,200 per R. The civil court enhanced the rate to Rs 2,065 per R for Jirayat land and Rs 2,900 per R for seasonally irrigated land. The …
The appellants challenged a 2011 compensation award in a land acquisition proceeding for the Yeldariwadi Storage Tank project, arguing that the award should reflect the market values previously determined by a coordinate bench in FA No. 1132/2012. The court noted that the controversy was identical …
The appellants, original claimants in a land acquisition proceeding initiated in 2004, challenged the District Judge’s award of compensation dated 18‑Oct‑2011 for land in the Yeldariwadi Storage Tank project, Latur. They argued that a later coordinate‑bench decision in FA No.1132/12, which fixed …
The Union of India (Central Railway) acquired lands in Loni Syed Mir village for a new railway line and the Reference Court enhanced the compensation rate from Rs. 860/1000 per R to Rs. 2,047 per R, treating the land as dry land, and awarded statutory benefits under Section 23(1‑A). The acquiring …
The Union of India, acting through the Central Railway, acquired lands in Loni Syed Mir village for a new railway line and the Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded compensation of Rs.860‑Rs.1,000 per R. The Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.2,047 per R, classifying the …
The Union of India (Central Railway) acquired land in Raghapur village, Beed district, for a new railway line and the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs 1,200 per R. The civil court enhanced the rate to Rs 2,065 per R for Jirayat land and Rs 2,900 per R for seasonally …
The Union of India, acting through the Central Railway, acquired land in Raghapur village, Beed district, for a new railway line and the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs 1,200 per R. The civil court enhanced the rate to Rs 2,065 per R for Jirayat land and Rs 2,900 per R …
The Union of India (Central Railway) acquired land in Raghapur village, Beed district for a new railway line and fixed a compensation rate of Rs 1,200 per R. The Civil Court enhanced the rate to Rs 2,065 per R for Jirayat land and Rs 2,900 per R for seasonally irrigated land. The acquiring body …
The appellants, Kausarali Shaukatali and Gopal Anand Chaudhari, appealed the compensation awards granted by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon in two land acquisition suits concerning the Upper Tapi Project. They argued that the rates of compensation should follow the earlier decision of this …
The Union of India, represented by the General Manager of Central Railway, appealed against a reference court award that enhanced compensation for land acquired in Raimoha village for a new railway line. The Special Land Acquisition Officer had initially offered Rs 2,110‑2,410 per R, but the …
The Union of India, represented by the Central Railway, appealed multiple first appeals challenging a common judgment and award dated 9 September 2019 that fixed compensation for lands acquired for a new railway line in Beed district. The Reference Court had enhanced the compensation rate from Rs …
The Union of India, represented by the Central Railway, acquired land in Rajuri Navgan village for a new railway line and initially offered compensation of Rs.2000‑2250 per R. Claimants filed reference petitions, and the Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.6875 per R for Jirayat land and …
The appellant's land in Rohina village was acquired under a Section 4 notification on 27‑04‑2000 for the Nimna Dudhana Project, with an award dated 10‑04‑2003 fixing compensation at Rs 800 per R. The appellant sought the benefit of escalation on the ground of parity, arguing that similar lands had …
The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, heard a group of first appeals challenging the compensation awarded in land acquisition cases concerning the Nimna Dudhana Project. The appellants argued that the compensation rates should follow a recent decision of the same court, which set the dry‑land …
The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, heard multiple first appeals (Nos. 1234‑1238 of 2017) challenging land acquisition awards dated 15‑04‑2015 and 17‑04‑2015. The appellants argued that the compensation rates should follow a recent order of this Court (13‑03‑2026) which fixed the dry‑land rate …
The appellants challenged the compensation awarded by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Parbhani, for lands acquired for the Nimna Dudhana Project. The Court observed that the controversy was identical to a prior decision (CA/2333/2026) and adopted the same methodology, fixing the …
The appeals (FA Nos. 1234‑1238 of 2017) challenged awards dated 15‑04‑2015 and 17‑04‑2015 made by the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Parbhani, in respect of land acquired for the Nimna Dudhana Project in Salegaon village. The petitioners contended that the compensation rates fixed for their lands were …
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) heard a batch of first appeals challenging the awards of the 2nd Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Parbhani, in land acquisition references concerning the Nimna Dudhana Project. The appellants argued that the compensation rates for their lands should be …
The applicant filed a civil application seeking condonation of a 15‑day delay and restoration of First Appeal No. 4908 of 2017. The appeal challenged a 2009 judgment and award in a land acquisition case, contending that compensation rates fixed in an earlier decision (Special Land Acquisition …
Kashinath Rupchand Patil appealed the 2010 judgment and award of the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jalgaon concerning compensation for land acquired under the Upper Tapi Project. The appellant argued that the compensation rates should follow a prior Division Bench decision in Special Land …
The appellant, representing the estate of the deceased Rajaram Patil, appealed against the 2009 judgment and award of the Joint Civil Judge in a land acquisition reference concerning the Upper Tapi Project. The appellant argued that the compensation rates for jirayat, bagayat, and potkharab land …
The applicant filed a civil application seeking restoration of a first appeal that had been dismissed due to a 15‑day delay in filing. The court condoned the delay and restored the appeal to its original state. The appeal challenged a 2009 judgment and award in a land acquisition reference, …
The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for the acquisition of house properties in Divi village, Dhule, arguing that the Reference Court had arbitrarily accepted only 75% of the private valuer's report. They relied on earlier decisions of the Court, including a common order dated …
The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for the acquisition of house properties in Divi village, Dhule, arguing that the Reference Court had arbitrarily accepted only 75% of the private valuer's report. They relied on earlier decisions of this Court, particularly a common order dated …
The appellant, owner of land acquired for the expansion of Vazirabad Chowk, challenged the compensation awarded by the Reference Court, seeking a higher rate for the constructed portion and compensation for an adjoining open space not mentioned in the acquisition notification. The High Court …
Shubhda L. Kundaikar purchased land in Ela village, which was later notified for acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and an award was passed in 2010 in favor of the predecessor-in-title, Stephen A. Pereira. Possession was taken by the Goa State Infrastructure Development Corporation …
The petitioner challenged an order of the Land Acquisition Officer under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, alleging improper service of notices under sections 12(2) and 16. The State showed that notices were served on 20 September 2013 and the petitioner accepted compensation on 25 January 2023. The …
The petitioners, Anil Baburao Vibhute and another, filed a writ petition seeking compensation under the 2013 Land Acquisition Act, alleging that earlier acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act had lapsed. Their counsel applied to withdraw the petition, stating that the pleadings were inadequate …
The petitioners, whose land was acquired in 1986, filed three representations to the Land Acquisition Officer under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking enhancement of compensation in line with Land Reference No. 29 of 1996. The first representation was filed on 28 June 2006, the …
The petitioners sought a declaration that a 1988 land acquisition proceeding had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Right to Fair Compensation Act and demanded a fresh award and compensation with interest. The State argued that compensation had been tendered under Section 31(1) of the 1894 Land …
The petitioner, Sou. Nandiniraje Niranjan Toraskar, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Satara to withdraw land allotments made from his land and a declaration that the acquisition of a portion of his land had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair …
The petitioner, an elderly widow, sought a declaration that the acquisition proceedings for her alternate land (Gat No.2358, 76‑R) had lapsed under Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and that the award dated 1 Nov 2004 was illegal and bad in law. The respondents argued that an award had …
The petitioners sought a declaration that the land acquisition proceeding concerning their land had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and asked for the 1988 award to be set aside and a fresh …
The petitioner, Sou. Nandiniraje Niranjan Toraskar, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Maharashtra to cancel land allotments made from his land and to declare that the acquisition of a portion of his land had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation …
The petitioners, a group of land owners, sought a direction for the State of Maharashtra and the Collector of Solapur to pay compensation determined by awards under Section 28A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, following a re‑determination of compensation based on an earlier enhanced award (LAR …
A group of petitioners sought a direction for the State of Maharashtra and its officials to pay compensation determined by awards under Section 28A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, following a re‑determination of compensation based on an earlier enhanced award (LAR No. 23 of 2003). The petitioners …
The petitioners, a group of land owners, sought a court order directing the State of Maharashtra and the Collector of Solapur to pay compensation determined by awards under Section 28A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, which had been re‑determined following an enhanced award in LAR No. 23 of 2003. The …
A group of petitioners sought a direction for the State of Maharashtra and other respondents to pay compensation determined by awards under Section 28A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, based on enhanced compensation awarded in Land Acquisition Reference No. 23 of 2003. The original award under …
The petitioners sought enforcement of compensation awards re‑determined under Section 28A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, following an enhancement granted in Land Acquisition Reference No. 23 of 2003. The respondents argued that such an award is a decree under Section 26 and therefore …
A group of petitioners sought a direction for the State of Maharashtra to pay compensation determined by awards under Section 28A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, following a re‑determination of compensation based on an earlier enhanced award (LAR No. 23 of 2003). The petitioners argued that the …
The petitioners sought a direction for the State of Maharashtra to pay compensation determined by awards under Section 28A(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, which re‑determined amounts based on a 2003 reference court award. The High Court examined whether an award passed by the Collector under Section …
The petitioners, including Evita Krisala Township LLP and two individual owners, sought the deletion of entries in the revenue records (7/12 extracts) that recorded the Kasarsai Left Canal Project acquisition on their lands. The respondents, representing the State of Maharashtra, submitted …
The petitioners, including Evita Krisala Township LLP and two individual owners, sought the deletion of entries in the revenue records (7/12 extracts) that recorded the Kasarsai Left Canal Project acquisition on their lands. The respondents, representing the State of Maharashtra, submitted …
The petitioners, including Evita Krisala Township LLP and two individual owners, sought the deletion of entries in the revenue records (7/12 extracts) that recorded the Kasarsai Left Canal Project acquisition on their lands. The respondents, representing the State of Maharashtra, submitted …
The petitioners, including Evita Krisala Township LLP and two individual owners, sought the deletion of entries in the revenue records (7/12 extracts) that recorded the Kasarsai Left Canal Project acquisition on their lands. The respondents, representing the State of Maharashtra, submitted …
The petitioners, Evita Krisala Township LLP and two individual owners, filed multiple writ petitions seeking the deletion of entries in the revenue records (7/12 extracts) that recorded the Kasarsai Left Canal Project on their lands. The respondents, representing the State of Maharashtra, admitted …
The petitioners, including Evita Krisala Township LLP and two individual owners, sought the deletion of entries in the revenue records (7/12 extracts) that recorded the Kasarsai Left Canal Project acquisition on their lands. The respondents, representing the State of Maharashtra, submitted …
The petitioners, including Evita Krisala Township LLP and two individual owners, sought the deletion of entries in the revenue records (7/12 extracts) that recorded the Kasarsai Left Canal Project acquisition on their lands. The respondents, representing the State of Maharashtra, submitted …
The State of Maharashtra appealed a land acquisition order where the Reference Court had fixed market value at Rs.27 per square meter for 1,730 sq. meters. The appeal had been dismissed for non‑prosecution, but the respondents sought restoration of the appeal and a reduction of the compensation rate …
The Executive Engineer, Raigad filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 4‑year‑323‑day delay in filing an appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court examined the applicant’s explanation, noting a long period of inaction from June 2018 …
The Executive Engineer, Raigad filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 4‑year‑323‑day delay in filing an appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court examined the applicant’s explanation, noting a long period of inaction from June 2018 …
The Executive Engineer filed an interim application seeking condonation of a delay of five years and 255 days in filing an appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court examined the applicant’s explanation for the delay, noting that the award was …
The Executive Engineer filed an interim application seeking condonation of a delay of five years and 255 days in filing an appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court examined the applicant’s explanation for the delay, noting that the award was …
The Executive Engineer (applicant) filed an interim application seeking condonation of a delay of five years and 234 days in filing an appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court examined the applicant’s explanation for the delay, noting that …
The Executive Engineer (applicant) filed an interim application seeking condonation of a delay of five years and 234 days in filing an appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court examined the applicant’s explanation for the delay, noting that …
The applicant, Amit Tyagi, filed a contempt petition alleging that the respondents, including the Tehsildar and the NOIDA Authority, had violated the status‑quo order dated 15 Oct 2025 issued in Writ C No. 33691 of 2025, which restrained any further development or alienation of certain land in …
The Executive Engineer, Hetvane, appealed a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking condonation of a delay of 4 years and 265 days in filing the appeal. The appellant argued that the COVID‑19 pandemic and procedural requirements caused the delay. The Court …
The Executive Engineer, Hetvane, appealed a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking condonation of a delay of 4 years and 265 days in filing the appeal. The appellant argued that the COVID‑19 pandemic and procedural requirements caused the delay. The Court …
The Executive Engineer, Raigad filed a first appeal under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against a reference award dated 12 April 2017. The appeal was filed on 17 July 2023, more than six years after the award, prompting an interim application seeking condonation of the delay. The …
The Executive Engineer, Raigad filed a first appeal under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against a reference award dated 12 April 2017. The appeal was filed on 17 July 2023, more than six years after the award, prompting an interim application seeking condonation of the delay. The …
Mahaveer Sharma filed a contempt application alleging that Ravi Kumar willfully defied the High Court's order dated 18 July 2025, which directed the Development Authority to pass a reasoned order on the allotment of 4% of acquired land within eight weeks. An affidavit indicated that the claim was …
The High Court of Allahabad entertained a contempt application filed by Kumar Pal and others, alleging willful defiance of its earlier order dated 23 March 2026 directing the Special Land Acquisition Officer to process and disburse compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. …
The petitioners, Vikram Singh and nine others, challenged a 21‑April‑2022 order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer that rejected their application under Section 28‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the ground that it was filed 14 days after the award was passed. They relied on a prior …
Petitioners Lila Singh and another challenged the order of the Special Land Acquisition Officer dated 21‑04‑2022 which rejected their application under Section 28‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the ground that it was filed 14 days after the prescribed period. They relied on a prior decision …
The petitioners, Babibai Atmaram Patil and an associate, applied for their impleadment in execution proceedings, claiming to be sisters of Decree‑Holder No. 1. Their applications (Exhibits‑24 and 25) were filed under Order XXI Rule 97 of the CPC and were rejected on 22 July 2015. The petition …
The petitioner, M/s Jasa Lumbaji & Co., challenged orders dated 04.12.2025 and 05.12.2025 by the Tahsildar, Thane, which deleted its name from the "other rights" column of the revenue record following a request from the Ministry of Defence. The petition sought directions for compensation under the …
The petitioner, Sindhubai Baliram Chavan, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Maharashtra to correct revenue records for her land in Raigad, alleging that acquisition proceedings from 1964 had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act and Section 11A of …
The Bombay High Court heard a writ petition filed by Maneka Co‑Operative Housing Society seeking a Transferable Development Right (TDR) for land acquired in 1984‑85. The Society had complied with the conditions of Development Control Regulation N‑2.4.17, handed over possession to the Pune Municipal …
The State of Maharashtra, represented by Shabnoor Ayub Pathan, filed an appeal under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenging a reference award dated 27 December 2018. An interim application was filed seeking condonation of a delay of nearly five years in preferring the appeal. The …
The State of Maharashtra filed an interim application seeking condonation of a delay of almost five years in filing an appeal against a Section 18 award under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court examined the applicant’s explanation, noting that the award was passed on 27 December 2018 but no …
The Executive Engineer appealed a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but filed the appeal after a delay of nearly five years. The appellant sought condonation of this delay, citing lack of timely action and procedural hurdles, including the Covid‑19 pandemic. The …
The Executive Engineer appealed a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but filed the appeal after a delay of nearly five years. The appellant sought condonation of this delay, citing lack of timely action and procedural hurdles, including the Covid‑19 pandemic. The …
The Executive Engineer, Hetvane Dam Division filed a first appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and sought condonation of a four‑year delay in filing the appeal. The appellant submitted Interim Application No. 9011 of 2024, claiming the delay was due …
The Executive Engineer, Hetvane Dam Division filed a first appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and sought condonation of a four‑year delay in filing the appeal. The appellant submitted Interim Application No. 9011 of 2024, claiming the delay was due …
The Executive Engineer, Hetvane Dam Division filed an appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but delayed filing the appeal for over six years. An interim application was made seeking condonation of this delay, citing various reasons including the …
The Executive Engineer, Hetvane Dam Division filed an appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but sought condonation of a 6‑year‑10‑day delay in filing the appeal. The appellant’s interim application argued that the delay was due to the COVID‑19 pandemic …
The Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation filed an appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but sought to condone a delay of 2,977 days in filing the appeal. The appellant submitted Interim Application No. 11503 seeking condonation, citing the …
The appellant, Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation, filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 2,977‑day delay in filing an appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court examined the applicant’s explanation for the …
The Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation filed a first appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but delayed filing the appeal by 2,928 days. The appellant sought condonation of this delay, arguing that the COVID‑19 pandemic and procedural …
The Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation filed a first appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but delayed filing the appeal by 2,928 days. The appellant sought condonation of this delay, arguing that the COVID‑19 pandemic and procedural …
The appellant, Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation, filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 2,977‑day delay in filing an appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court examined the applicant’s explanation for the …
The petitioners, owners of 6,900 sq m of land in Bhayander, claimed that the State and MTNL had possessed the land since 1989 without paying compensation or completing acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. Parallel …
The petitioners, Maharashtra State PWD Employees CHS Ltd., own land in Erandawane and challenged a resolution by Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) that declared a portion of their property a new public street under Section 205 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act (MMC Act) without any …
The petitioners, owners of 6,900 sq m of land in Bhayander, claimed that the State and MTNL had possessed the land since 1989 without paying compensation or completing acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. Parallel …
The petitioners in five writ petitions sought additional compensation for portions of land reserved for internal roads and open spaces that were acquired for the Nagpur‑Mumbai Highway, alleging that the agreements executed under Section 19‑B(2) of the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955 paid compensation …
The Bombay High Court considered five writ petitions filed by original land owners, power‑of‑attorney holders and assignees seeking additional compensation for portions of land reserved for internal roads and open spaces under the Nagpur‑Mumbai Highway project. The lands had been acquired by …
The Bombay High Court considered five writ petitions filed by original land owners, power‑of‑attorney holders and assignees seeking additional compensation for portions of land reserved for internal roads and open spaces under the Nagpur‑Mumbai Highway project. The lands had been acquired by …
The petitioners filed five writ petitions seeking additional compensation for portions of land reserved for internal roads and open spaces that were acquired for the Nagpur‑Mumbai Highway. The lands had been converted to non‑agricultural use and acquired under the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955, …
The Bombay High Court considered five writ petitions filed by original land owners, power‑of‑attorney holders and assignees seeking additional compensation for portions of land reserved for internal roads and open spaces under the Nagpur‑Mumbai Highway project. The lands had been acquired by …
The Executive Engineer filed a first appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but delayed filing the appeal for 4 years and 323 days. An interim application was made seeking condonation of this delay, with the applicant alleging various reasons …
The Executive Engineer filed a first appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but delayed filing the appeal for 4 years and 323 days. An interim application was made seeking condonation of this delay, with the applicant alleging various reasons …
The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the apportionment of enhanced compensation under Section 28‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, claiming that the dispute should be referred to the competent court under Section 30 of the same Act. The High Court noted that a reference court had …
The State of Maharashtra filed a first appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but sought condonation of a delay of 4 years and 351 days in filing the appeal. The appellant explained the delay, citing the period after the award, the COVID‑19 pandemic, and …
The appellants sought condonation of a delay of 4 years and 351 days in filing a first appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court examined the explanation offered for the delay, noting that the award was passed on 10 May 2018 but a certified …
The Executive Engineer, Raigad Irrigation, filed a first appeal against a reference award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appeal was lodged more than four years after the award, prompting the appellant to seek condonation of the delay through Interim Application No. …
The Executive Engineer, Raigad Irrigation, filed a first appeal against a reference award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appeal was lodged more than four years after the award, prompting the appellant to seek condonation of the delay through Interim Application No. …
The State of Maharashtra, represented by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, filed an appeal against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appellant sought condonation of a delay of five years and 212 days in filing the appeal, citing the Covid‑19 pandemic and …
The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 challenging a reference award dated 13 February 2025. The appeal was filed after a delay of five years and 212 days, and the State sought condonation of this delay. The Court examined the applicant’s …
The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 challenging a reference award dated 13 February 2025. The appeal was filed after a delay of five years and 212 days, and the State sought condonation of this delay. The Court examined the applicant’s …
The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 challenging a reference award dated 13 February 2025. The appeal was filed after a delay of five years and 212 days, and the State sought condonation of this delay. The Court examined the applicant’s …
The Executive Engineer, Raigad appealed against a Reference Award under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, filed by the legal heirs of the deceased Durgi Vikram Gothal. The appellant sought condonation of a delay of over four years in filing the appeal, citing reasons including the …
The appellants, heirs of protected tenants, sought a temporary injunction to restrain respondents (CIDCO and others) from further development of Plot No.20D, Airoli, pending a suit challenging mutation entries and claiming ownership under a Section 32M certificate of the Maharashtra Tenancy and …
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the compensation awarded by the Reference Court in Land Reference No. 605/1991 concerning 0.80 ares of agricultural land (Gat No.862) acquired for a state highway. The Reference Court had enhanced the compensation from the Special Land Acquisition Officer's …
The petitioner, owner of three parcels of land in Village Dapodi, claimed that the reservation of his land in the Pune Municipal Corporation development plan had lapsed after more than ten years without acquisition, invoking Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The …
The State of Maharashtra appealed a decision of the Reference Court concerning compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and filed two interim applications. The first sought a direction to accept a court fee challan dated 27 January 2021 as valid, despite its delayed annexation caused by …
The State of Maharashtra appealed a decision of the Reference Court concerning compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and filed two interim applications. The first sought a direction to accept a court fee challan dated 27 January 2021 as valid, despite its delayed annexation caused by …
A large number of writ petitions were filed by heirs of landowners alleging that their applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, filed in 1993, had remained pending for 33 years without any order. The petitioners sought directions for disposal of these applications. The Court …
Vimal Subhash Sathe filed a writ petition seeking deletion of reservation entries in the 7/12 revenue extract for his land at Gat No.30, Village Nere, Pune, which were recorded for the Kasarsai Ujawa Kalwa irrigation project. The petitioner argued that the land was never actually acquired, citing a …
The petitioners filed writ petitions seeking redress for applications filed under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in 1993 that had remained pending for 33 years. The Court observed that the delay was unacceptable and that the Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Metro Centre No.3, …
A large number of writ petitions were filed by heirs of landowners alleging that their applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, filed in 1993, had remained pending for 33 years without any order. The petitioners sought directions for disposal of these applications. The Court …
A large number of writ petitions were filed by heirs of landowners alleging that their applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, filed in 1993, had remained pending for 33 years without any order. The petitioners sought directions for disposal of these applications. The Court …
A large number of writ petitions were filed by heirs of landowners alleging that their applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, filed in 1993, had remained pending for 33 years without any order. The petitioners sought directions for disposal of these applications. The Court …
A large number of writ petitions were filed by heirs of landowners alleging that their applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, filed in 1993, had remained pending for 33 years without any order. The petitioners sought directions for disposal of these applications. The Court …
A large number of writ petitions were filed by heirs of landowners alleging that their applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, filed in 1993, had remained pending for 33 years without any order. The petitioners sought directions for disposal of these applications. The Court …
A large number of writ petitions were filed by heirs of landowners alleging that their applications under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, filed in 1993, had remained pending for 33 years without any order. The petitioners sought directions for disposal of these applications. The Court …
The appellants, a group of landowners, appealed against the State of Maharashtra challenging the Reference Court's failure to direct interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on amounts awarded under Sections 23(1A) and 23(2). The High Court noted that while interest was directed …
The appellants, a group of landowners, appealed against the State of Maharashtra challenging the Reference Court's failure to direct interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on amounts awarded under Sections 23(1A) and 23(2). The High Court noted that while interest was directed …
Supdu Tulshiram Patil appealed against the State of Maharashtra challenging the Reference Court's failure to award interest under Section 28 on the compensation awarded under Sections 23(1A) and 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High Court noted that a similar issue had arisen in Ambadas …
The State, represented by the Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer, appealed against a Reference Court award that granted an additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre for land acquired for the Kalikua Irrigation Pond Canal, over the original award of Rs 6.90 per square metre. The …
The State of Gujarat acquired land in Zampodar village under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, issuing a Section 4 notification in 1991 and a Section 6 notification in 1992. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation based on rates for Bagayat and Jirayat land, but the appellants were …
The petitioners, Dahyabhai Bhalabhai Charan and others, filed a special civil application against the State of Gujarat seeking to quash notices and an order that declared them "unauthorized occupants" and directed eviction, and to have them recognized as forest dwellers under the Scheduled Tribes …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against an award by the Principal Civil Judge that granted the land owners additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre, along with statutory solatium and interest. The acquiring body argued that …
The appellants owned non‑agricultural residential land in Motipura, Himmatnagar, which was acquired for the Idar‑Vijapur bypass road. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs.135 per square metre, which the Reference Court later increased by Rs.77.80 per square metre. Dissatisfied, …
The appellants owned non‑agricultural residential land in Motipura, Himmatnagar, which was acquired for the Idar‑Vijapur bypass road. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs.135 per square metre, which the Reference Court later increased by Rs.77.80 per square metre. Dissatisfied, …
The petitioners, owners of land acquired for the Kukadi Dam Project, obtained a land acquisition award on 31 May 1999 but have not received any compensation despite possession being taken. They contend that, under the proviso to Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The case concerned the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Pune, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Officer’s award (Rs.40,000‑Rs.46,000 per hectare) was far below market value and sought a rate of …
The case involved a group of land acquisition appeals concerning Village Parhar (Khurd) in Pune, acquired for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was far below market value and sought a rate of Rs.3,68,000 per hectare, …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The case concerned the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Pune, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Officer’s award (Rs.40,000‑Rs.46,000 per hectare) was far below market value and sought a rate of …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The case concerned the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Pune, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Officer’s award (Rs.40,000‑Rs.46,000 per hectare) was far below market value and sought a rate of …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The High Court of Bombay heard a group of first appeals arising from the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Taluka Bhor, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (Rs.40,000‑46,000 per hectare) …
The case concerned the acquisition of agricultural lands in Village Parhar (Khurd), Pune, for the Neera Deoghar Project. The claimants argued that the compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Officer’s award (Rs.40,000‑Rs.46,000 per hectare) was far below market value and sought a rate of …
The Executive Engineer of the Minor Irrigation Department filed an interim application seeking condonation of a delay of five years and 295 days in filing an appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court examined the applicant’s explanation for …
The Executive Engineer, Hetvane Canal Division, filed an interim application seeking condonation of a delay of nearly five years in filing an appeal against a Reference Award passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court noted that the award was dated 22 March 2018, yet the …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, acquired land in Ghoti village for a road project and fixed compensation via an award under Section 11. The claimants, dissatisfied with the compensation, filed a reference under Section 18, seeking a higher …
The Special Land Acquisition Officer acquired land in Ghoti village for a road project under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and fixed compensation via an award under Section 11. The claimants challenged the compensation, filing a reference under Section 18, and the Reference Court …
The High Court of Gujarat entertained a review application filed by Jagdishbhai Lakhubhai Patel seeking relief against the State of Gujarat and others. The Court first condoned the delay in filing the review, noting no serious objection. The applicant argued that a 379 sq.m. area reserved for a …
The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against a Land Reference Court award that granted claimants an additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre for land acquired for the Kali Kuva Irrigation Pond Canal project. The original award by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was …
The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against a Land Reference Court award that granted claimants an additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre for land acquired for the Kali Kuva Irrigation Pond Canal project. The original award by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was …
The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against a Land Reference Court award that granted claimants an additional compensation of Rs 300 per square metre for land acquired for the Kali Kuva Irrigation Pond Canal project. The original award by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was …
The appellant challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired for the Dharoi Canal Yojana, arguing that the award of Rs.149 per square metre (Rs.12 + Rs.137) was insufficient. The original award was made under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the claimants had sought Rs.1,000 …
The State appealed a common judgment and award dated 31 January 2009, which had granted the original claimants an additional compensation of Rs 100 per square metre over the amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants' lands in Osara …
The State appealed a common judgment and award dated 31 January 2009, which had granted the original claimants an additional compensation of Rs 100 per square metre over the amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants' lands in Osara …
The State appealed a common judgment and award dated 31 January 2009, which had granted the original claimants an additional compensation of Rs 100 per square metre over the amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants' lands in Osara …
The National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) sought arbitration under the National Highways Act for compensation relating to land acquisition, resulting in an arbitral award on 03‑02‑2022. Both parties filed applications under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which were …
The petitioners, land owners, challenged the award dated 30.05.2020 which granted only the base market value (multiplication factor I) and omitted the additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement …
The petitioners, co‑owners of land acquired for a national highway, challenged the award dated 01‑06‑2020 for failing to grant the additional compensation of 12% under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (the …
The petitioners sought the benefit of additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, calculated on the market value that includes the multiplication factor‑2 under Section 26(2). The Court …
