Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Land Acquisition Act, 1894

2126 judgments · newest first · showing 1201–1400

RATTI RAMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2016 INSC 187Appeal(s) allowed

In a land acquisition case, the Supreme Court examined whether interest on enhanced compensation under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 could be denied for the period during which the reference proceedings were stayed at the appellant's instance. The trial court had refused interest for …

CHANDRAKANT ADINATH UTTUREversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS

2016 INSC 167Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from the Chikotra irrigation project where the State of Maharashtra first notified land acquisition under Slab III for the benefitted zone and later changed to Slab I, thereby increasing the area of land to be acquired. The petitioners contended that this change required a public …

STATE OF HARYANAversusEROS CITY DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS

2016 INSC 62Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana issued notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire 129 kanals 14 marlas of land in Lakarpur, Faridabad for the expansion and systematic development of the Surajkund Tourist Complex, including a parking area. Earlier acquisition attempts in …

K.S. SANJEEV (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF KERALA AND ANR.

2016 INSC 22Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, were awarded Rs 11,000 per cent as compensation by the Land Acquisition Officer. They contended that a comparable parcel of land (document A‑4) had been sold for Rs 17,250 per cent on 27‑Oct‑1986, and that this sale should …

K.B. RAMACHANDRA RAJE URS (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA& ORS. ETC.

2015 INSC 928Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the acquisition of 94 acres 28 gunthas of land in Vijayashreepura under the Mysore Improvement Act, 1903, which was used to allot 55 acres to JSS Mahavidyapeetha (respondent No.28). The Court found that the statutory requirement of a published scheme before issuing a …

RATTAN SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2015 INSC 896Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 applies to land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 when the award predates the 2013 Act by at least five years and either …

MOLUGU MAHIPAL REDDY AND ORS.versusM PRADEEP KUMAR AND ORS.

2015 INSC 1035Remitted to Lower Court

A public‑interest writ petition (PIL No.130 of 2014) challenged the registration of land in Survey Nos.215 and 222, alleging illegal occupation of government land. The High Court allowed the PIL and directed officials to act, even extending its order to Survey Nos.244 and 246, which the appellants …

STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.versusNORTHERN INDIAN GLASS INDUSTRIES LTD.

2015 INSC 745Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Haryana acquired land in 1973 for a sheet‑glass factory and conveyed it to Northern Indian Glass Industries Ltd. (NIGI) under a deed that prohibited sale without the State’s written permission and required construction of the factory within a stipulated period. NIGI failed to build the …

M. VENKATESH AND ORS.versusCOMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

2015 INSC 1027Disposed off

The plaintiffs, M. Venkatesh and others, claimed ownership of land acquired by the Bangalore Development Authority (BOA) under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, asserting settled possession and adverse possession of the vacant parcels after demolition of structures. BOA contended that the land vested …

TATA STEEL LTD.versusSTATE OF JHARKHAND & OTHERS

2015 INSC 1028Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar (later Jharkhand) granted Tata Steel 350 acres of land in 1969 (Grant‑I) for a 99‑year lease, requiring use of the land for a specified industrial purpose within one year. Tata Steel utilized about 200 acres for its alloy and steel plants. In 1973 the State transferred 1,266 acres …

M/S PERIYAR & PAREEKANNI RUBBERS LTD.versusSTATE OF KERALA

2015 INSC 659Matter referred to larger bench

The appellants, Periyar & Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd., challenged a Kerala High Court order that limited interest on solatium to the period after 19 September 2001, the date of the Sunder judgment. The land had been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Reference Court had awarded …

LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS.versusMATWAL CHAND (D) THR. LRS.

2015 INSC 638Appeal(s) allowed

The subject land was originally evacuee property that was acquired by the Central Government under Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 and placed in the compensation pool. It was subsequently auctioned to the respondents, who obtained provisional …

M/S. SOORAJMULL NAGARMULLversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2015 INSC 579Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Bihar initiated acquisition of land belonging to M/s. Soorajmull Nagarmull in 1981 under Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, taking possession but failing to publish an award. Subsequent notifications in 1995‑96 attempted a fresh acquisition. The High Court held that the 1981 …

PEERAPPA HANMANTHA HARIJAN (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA&ANR.

2015 INSC 536Disposed off

The State of Karnataka acquired agricultural land for industrial development under the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966, and transferred it to the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board (KIADB), which later allotted the land to Ultra Tech Cement Ltd on a lease basis. The …

LAXMI DEVIversusSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

2015 INSC 478Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, land owners, challenged the State of Bihar’s acquisition of their land under the urgency provision of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, alleging that no award had been made despite a High Court direction in 1988 to do so within four months. The State argued that Section …

SAVITRI DEVIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2015 INSC 409Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined challenges to land acquisitions in Noida and Greater Noida made under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where the State invoked Section 17’s urgency provisions to dispense with the Section 5A objection right. The High Court had held the urgency invocation illegal but, …

THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, TNHB & ANR.versusS. SARASWATHY & ORS.

2015 INSC 396Appeal(s) allowed

The Tamil Nadu Housing Board (TNHB) appealed against orders of the Madras High Court that had directed it to issue No Objection Certificates to purchasers of land that had been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land in question had been notified for acquisition under Section 4 and a …

K. DEVAKIMMA & ORS.versusTIRUMALA TIRUPATI DEVASTHANAMS & ANR.

2015 INSC 350Case Partly allowed

The appellants, small shop‑owners in Tirumala, challenged the compensation awarded for their land acquired by the State for the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Reference Court had fixed a market value of Rs.80‑100 per square foot based on escalation of …

BHUPAL SINGH AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF HARYANA

2015 INSC 279Case Partly allowed

The State of Haryana acquired large tracts of undeveloped agricultural land in 1977 for residential development, and the landowners sought compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed the fair market value at Rs.16.52 per square yard, which was later enhanced to Rs.22 by the reference …

MOHAN SINGH GILL & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. ETC.

2015 INSC 261Case Partly allowed

The appellants challenged two land acquisition notifications issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the construction of a road (Missing Link‑II) and a residential urban estate in Ludhiana. They argued that a large portion of the land was intended for commercial development, a purpose not …

BHARGAVA & ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2015 INSC 185Disposed off

The appellants, land owners, challenged acquisition proceedings originally under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and after the 2013 Act came into force, sought a declaration of lapse under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and …

NCT OF DELHI AND ORSversusJAGJIT SINGH AND ORS.

2015 INSC 179Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the operation of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. It held that an acquisition proceeding is deemed to have lapsed when an award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, …

GUJARAT MINERAL DEV. CORPN.versusRAM SANG BHAILALBHAI &ANR.

2015 INSC 168Dismissed

The Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation (GMDC) acquired land in villages Bhuri and Rajpardi for a lignite project under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at low rates, which were later increased by the Reference Court. The High …

M/S. COMPETENT AUTOMOBILES CO. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2015 INSC 162Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether acquisitions made under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 could be declared lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. It held that a declaration of lapse requires a …

GODREJ & BOYCE MANUFACTURING.CO.LTD.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2015 INSC 59Appeal(s) allowed

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. owned land in Vikhroli that was reserved in the 1991 Development Plan for acquisition by the Ministry of Railways to lay additional tracks. The reservation required acquisition within ten years or, failing that, the landowner could serve a notice and, if no …

HASMUKHRAI V MEHTAversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2014 INSC 828Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Hasmukhrai Mehta, owned land in Village Sheel, Raigad, which was originally included in a 1977 residential development plan. In 1999 the land was re‑designated for an Agricultural Produce Market Yard and a truck terminal, and the appellant served a purchase notice under Section 49 of …

PRAFULLA C. DAVE & ORS.versusMUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER & ORS.

2014 INSC 827Dismissed

The appellants owned land that had been reserved for a public garden under a development plan notified in 1966 and continued under a revised plan in 1987. They served a notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act in 1989, seeking acquisition, but the notice was issued …

M/S MAGNUM PROMOTERS P. LTD.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 816Appeal(s) allowed

M/s Magnum Promoters Ltd., the owner of land in Delhi, challenged acquisition notifications issued under the repealed Land Acquisition Act, 1894, arguing that no physical possession was taken and compensation was not paid, invoking Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in …

INDIAN COUNCIL OF MEDICAL RESEARCHversusT.N. SANIKOP & ANR. ETC. ETC.

2014 INSC 1027Case Partly allowed

The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) sought to acquire 40 guntas of land in Belgaum for a medical research centre, and the Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 1,050 per gunta. The reference court enhanced this to Rs 7,000 per gunta, and the Karnataka High Court …

MAJ. GEN. KAPIL MEHRA & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2014 INSC 734Dismissed

The appellants, Maj. Gen. Kapil Mehra and others, challenged the compensation awarded by the Delhi Development Authority for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High Court had fixed the market value at Rs.14,974 per square yard by averaging four perpetual lease deeds, adding 20% …

RAUNAQ EDUCATION FOUNDATIONversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2014 INSC 725Dismissed

The Raunaq Education Foundation was allotted 76 acres of forest land by the State of Haryana in 1972 for establishing an educational complex, subject to conditions of timely construction. The foundation failed to develop the school for decades, prompting the Gram Panchayat to seek return of the …

PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR.versusKAUSARBAG COOP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. & ANR.

2014 INSC 697Dismissed

The case concerned a claim by Kausarbag Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. for Transferable Development Rights (TDR) on a 3.5‑acre parcel that had been acquired by the State under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and shown as an existing garden in the development plan. The Society argued that under …

STATE OF HARYANA& ORS.versusM/S. VINOD OIL& GENERAL MILLS &ANR.

2014 INSC 667Disposed off

The respondents, a partnership that set up an industrial unit in 1981, were initially excluded from a 1992 land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. In 2004 the State of Haryana re‑issued acquisition notifications for two strips of their land to develop a residential‑commercial sector. …

SREE BALAJI NAGAR RESIDENTIAL ASSOCIATIONversusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU & ORS.

2014 INSC 617Disposed off

The appellants, a residents' association, challenged land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a canal scheme, where an award was made on 30‑Nov‑2006 but physical possession of the land was never taken and the proceedings were stayed by the courts. The Right to …

UNION OF INDIAversusRAJ KUMAR BAGHAL SINGH (DEAD) TH. LRS. & ORS.

2014 INSC 613Dismissed

The Union of India acquired two parcels of land in Punjab for a military cantonment under notifications of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1989 and 1988). The Collector initially fixed compensation at Rs 2 lakhs per acre, which was later enhanced by the Reference Court and subsequently reduced by …

MOHINDER SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA

2014 INSC 522Disposed off

The State of Haryana acquired 90.07 acres of land in Shahabad, Kurukshetra under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for urban development. The claimants challenged the compensation awarded by the Reference Court, arguing that the deduction for development charges should be limited because the land lay …

RANJIT SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2014 INSC 988Disposed off

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for lands acquired by the State of Haryana under five notifications dated between 1980 and 1983, seeking enhancement of the market value. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Subhash Chander & Ors. v. State of Haryana, they argued that the …

JAI KRISHAN (D) TR. LRS.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.

2014 INSC 446Case Partly allowed

The appellants sought compensation for 36 acres of land acquired in Mussoorie for the extension of the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy. The High Court had applied the "belting area" principle, presuming the entire tract to be sloppy and hilly, and rejected the claim for 12% enhanced …

BANKATLALversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & ANR.

2014 INSC 977Dismissed

The appellant challenged land acquisition of 10.80 acres undertaken under the Nagpur Improvement Trust Act, 1966. An award was passed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in 1968, later set aside by the High Court in 1974 only on compensation grounds. While the proceedings were pending, Section 11A …

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusM/S. JASWANT SUGAR MILLS LTD. & ORS.ETC.

2014 INSC 429Disposed off

The State of Uttar Pradesh sought to recover dues of M/s Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd. arising from arrears, loans and other liabilities incurred before the company's acquisition under the U.P. State Sugar Undertakings (Acquisition) Act, 1971. The District Collector had adjusted compensation payable for …

UNION OF INDIA & ORSversusSHIV RAJ & ORS.

2014 INSC 368Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a large tract of land in Delhi. Tenure‑holders had filed objections under Section 5‑A, which were heard by one Land Acquisition Collector but the report was prepared by his successor, prompting …

VINOD KAPUR & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2014 INSC 368Appeal(s) allowed

The land in dispute was notified for acquisition under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 25‑11‑1980. The appellant, Vinod Kapur, purchased the land in 1985 and a declaration under Section 6 was issued on 7‑6‑1985, followed by an award in 1987‑88. The High Court of Delhi upheld the …

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusCHATRO DEVI & ORS.

2014 INSC 368Dismissed

The appeals filed by the Union of India and other respondents challenged the validity of acquisition proceedings that had been initiated after tenure‑holders raised objections under Section 5‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The petitioners contended that the objections were maintainable and …

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusGEETA DEVI

2014 INSC 368Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered the appeal of the Union of India challenging the quashing of land acquisition proceedings against land later purchased by Geeta Devi. The original tenure holder had lodged objections under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which the competent authority failed …

V. KALA BHARATHI & ORS.versusTHE ORIENTAL INS. CO. LTD., BR. CHITOOR

2014 INSC 236Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, legal heirs of a deceased road‑accident victim, were awarded Rs.98.40 million with 12% interest by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The insurer appealed, reduced the principal to Rs.56.40 million but retained the interest rate, and made several partial payments. The Executing …

BHULE RAMversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2014 INSC 222Dismissed

The appellant Bhule Ram challenged the compensation awarded for his land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, arguing that the market value should be Rs 10,00,000 per acre. The award was initially Rs 4,65,000 per acre, later enhanced to Rs 5,99,850 by the reference court and to Rs 6,51,000 …

RAJA RAM & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2014 INSC 222Dismissed

The case concerned appeals and special leave petitions filed by Raja Ram and others challenging the award of compensation under Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking enhancement of the amount payable. The respondents, Union of India and others, contended that the compensation awarded …

SHEELA JAWARLAL NAGORI & ANR.versusKANTILAL NATHMAL BALDOTA & ORS.

2014 INSC 205Dismissed

The landlord filed a suit for eviction of tenants occupying an open plot in Pune. The tenants contended that the Pune Municipal Corporation had acquired the land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and that an award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer had divested the landlord of any …

DEFENCE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONversusANJANAPPA & ANR.

2014 INSC 145Dismissed

The Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) acquired a large tract of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, via notifications in 1993 and 1995. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially valued the land at Rs. 60,000 per acre, but the Reference Court, on a Section 18 application, …

PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR.versusHARAKCHAND MISIRIMAL SOLANKI & ORS.

2014 INSC 53Dismissed

The Pune Municipal Corporation initiated land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, issuing a notification in 2004, a declaration in 2005 and making an award on 31 January 2008. The award was not paid to the landowners nor deposited in court; the compensation amount was …

BHUSAWAL MUNICIPAL COUNCILversusNIVRUTTI RAMCHANDRA PHALAK & ORS.

2013 INSC 844Dismissed

The Bhusawal Municipal Council acquired 4.25 acres of agricultural land under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to build a primary school. After paying the initial compensation awarded under Section 11, the respondents obtained a reference court …

KASHMIR SINGHversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2013 INSC 832Disposed off

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector and affirmed by the Additional District Judge for land acquired under a 2001 Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in Tohana, Fatehabad, Haryana. They argued that the market value should be …

KN ASWATHNARAYANA SETTY (D) TR. LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2013 INSC 801Dismissed

The petitioners purchased land that had been subject to a Section 4 notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, while the de‑notification of that acquisition was under appeal before the Supreme Court. The Court held that a purchaser after such a notification cannot challenge the acquisition …

GOJER BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 791Appeal(s) allowed

Gojer Brothers Private Limited had leased land to a school which, after a prolonged eviction suit, continued to occupy the premises. The State of West Bengal issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire the land for the school, and the appellant filed …

T.C. GUPTA & ANR.versusHARI OM PRAKASH & ORS.

2013 INSC 694Appeal(s) allowed

The respondents challenged the acquisition of their land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Punjab & Haryana High Court ordered the state officials (appellants) to furnish names of landowners whose lands were released without filing objections under Section 5A. The appellants mistakenly …

SINGARENI COLLIERIES CO. LTD.versusVEMUGANTI RAMAKRISHAN RAO & ORS.

2013 INSC 578Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined whether the time taken to obtain a certified copy of a High Court order vacating a stay could be excluded from the two‑year period prescribed under Section 11‑A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for making an award. The Court held that Section 11‑A only excludes the period …

BASAWARAJ & ANR.versusTHE SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

2013 INSC 551Dismissed

The appellants challenged the acquisition of their land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and, after receiving an award, filed references for enhanced compensation. Dissatisfied with the award, they filed appeals under Section 54 of the Act in the High Court on 16 August 2007, more than five …

M/S V.K.M. KATTHA INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2013 INSC 538Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, V.K.M. Kattha Industries Pvt. Ltd., a running industrial unit, challenged a land acquisition notification issued by the Haryana Government under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the development of an industrial estate. The company argued that the notification was not …

DIGAMBER & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2013 INSC 505Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Maharashtra acquired agricultural land for the purpose of establishing an industrial estate under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Special Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded compensation of Rs 50,000 per hectare, which the landowners challenged. The reference court, on a …

RAMANLAL DEOCHAND SHAHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.

2013 INSC 443Case Partly allowed

The State of Maharashtra acquired land for a polytechnic college and the Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs 26.25 per square metre. The landowners sought a higher amount by invoking Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the reference court enhanced the …

M/S MUTHA ASSOCIATES AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2013 INSC 433Disposed off

The case concerned the acquisition of land in Pune for the extension of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC) market yard, designated for a "Bamboo Trade and Flea Market". The land owners and Mutha Associates failed to object during the planning and acquisition stages and only challenged …

KAZI AKILODDIN SUJAODDINversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2013 INSC 425Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra took possession of the appellant's land in 1998 for a flood protection wall and later issued acquisition notifications under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation in 2000, and the State paid rental compensation based on …

PREMWATIversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2013 INSC 414Case Partly allowed

The appellants' land in Shahibabad Daulatpur village was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquisition officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 13,000 per bigha (Block A) and Rs 6,000 per bigha (Block B). The Reference Court enhanced it to Rs 17,500–18,000 per bigha, and the Delhi …

AHSANUL HODAversusSTATE OF BIHAR

2013 INSC 389Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's 3.54 acres of agricultural land were acquired for a reservoir project, and the Collector initially paid Rs.6,513.60 based on a market rate of Rs.16 per decimal. The Reference Court later fixed a higher compensation of Rs.250 per decimal and awarded Rs.10,000 for damage to standing …

JAYAMMA & ORS.versusTHE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN DIST., HASSAN AND ORS.

2013 INSC 312Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of residential houses in Mukundur village, claimed that seepage from a canal had caused damage to their homes and sought a mandamus directing the Land Acquisition Collector to complete acquisition proceedings as per a government letter. The High Court had ordered the …

RAM PRAKASH AGARWAL & ANR.versusGOPI KRISHAN (DEAD THROUGH L.RS.) & ORS.

2013 INSC 239Appeal(s) allowed

The land in question was jointly owned and was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. One co‑owner (the appellants) filed a reference under Section 18 of the Act for enhanced compensation without impleading the other co‑owner (the respondent). The Reference Court awarded compensation to both …

ASHRAFI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

2013 INSC 240Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard a batch of appeals concerning compensation for lands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in Haryana. The Court examined the method of determining market value, the appropriateness of deductions for development costs, the use of the belting system, and the manner of …

MAHADEO (D) THROUGH LRS & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2013 INSC 221Dismissed

The State of Uttar Pradesh, through the Meerut Development Authority (MDA), acquired 246.931 acres of land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a planned residential/commercial scheme. After the award and possession were taken, the MDA resolved in 1997 to withdraw acquisition of 204.912 acres, …

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NANDUR, MADHAMESHWAR CANALversusVILAS EKNATH JADHAV AND OTHERS

2013 INSC 202Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, the Executive Engineer, had taken possession of land belonging to the respondents on 3 June 2001, but the preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued only on 30 December 2006. The respondents claimed compensation, rent, and interest for the …

BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusM/S VIJAYA LEASING LTD. & ORS.

2013 INSC 197Appeal(s) allowed

The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) acquired land under the Bangalore Improvement Act, 1945, with possession handed over to the government on 9 December 1983. A de‑notification under Section 48(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 5 October 1999, and later recalled on 27 June …

LAXMAN LAL (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

2013 INSC 133Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants challenged the acquisition of their land for a bus stand, arguing that the preliminary notification issued on 01‑05‑1980 had lapsed because the declaration under Section 6 was made on 19‑03‑1987, well beyond the two‑year limit imposed by Section 5(2) of the 1981 Amendment Act, and …

BHIMANDAS AMBWANI (D) THR. LRS.versusDELHI POWER COMPANY LIMITED & ORS.

2013 INSC 96Disposed off

The appellants, owners of land in Delhi, were dispossessed following a series of notifications and a declaration under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (notifications of 1963, 1968 and 1983). The Supreme Court held that each later notification supersedes the earlier ones and that the 1983 notification …

THE COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.versusBRIJESH REDDY & ANR.

2013 INSC 86Appeal(s) allowed

The Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) had acquired certain lands under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the 1960s and 1970s. In 1995 Brijesh Reddy purchased a portion of such land and later filed a suit in a civil court seeking a permanent injunction restraining the BDA from interfering with …

SARASWATI DEVI (D) BY LR.versusDELHI DEVT. AUTHORITY & ORS.

2013 INSC 65Dismissed

The case concerned a 5‑bigha parcel of land that was an evacuee property acquired by the Central Government under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 and later put up for public auction. The appellant’s husband was the highest bidder in 1958, received provisional …

JAYESH DHANESH GORAGANDHIversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI & ORS.

2012 INSC 566Dismissed

The appellants, heirs of a plot of land in Borivali, challenged the reservation of their land for a municipal office under a Town Planning Scheme prepared under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act). After the scheme was finalized, an arbitrator determined compensation, …

STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.versusKARTAR SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS.

2012 INSC 549Disposed off

The State of Haryana acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the reference court enhanced compensation in 1980, awarding 15% solatium and 6% interest. After the 1984 amendment to the Act, the landowners filed applications under CPC sections 151 and 152 in 1989 seeking the enhanced …

VOLTAS LIMITEDversusTEHSILDAR, THANE & ORS.

2012 INSC 511Appeal(s) allowed

The Maharashtra government acquired land for Voltas Ltd. and issued an allotment order in 1969 restricting alienation without prior permission and mandating use for workers' housing. Voltas later obtained an exemption under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, to develop surplus land …

TUKARAM KANA JOSHI & ORS. THR. POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDERversusM.I.D.C. & ORS.

2012 INSC 503Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' ancestral land was notified for acquisition in 1964, but the acquisition proceedings lapsed while the State took possession and handed it over to the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation without paying compensation. The appellants filed a writ petition seeking compensation, …

SURINDER SINGH BRAR AND OTHERS ETC.ETC.versusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 463Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the acquisition of about 105 acres of land in Manimajra, Chandigarh for the expansion of the Rajiv Gandhi Technology Park (Phase III). The acquisition was approved by the Adviser to the Administrator of the Union Territory based on reports of the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO), …

V. CHANDRASEKARAN & ANR.versusTHE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER & ORS.

2012 INSC 407Dismissed

The case concerned land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 where a Section 4 notification was issued in 1978 and a Section 6 declaration in 1981 covering a parcel of land (the suit land). The original tenure‑holders accepted compensation under protest, did not file any objection under …

M/S. REAL ESTATE AGENCIESversusGOVT. OF GOA & ORS.

2012 INSC 387Disposed off

The petitioners, a real‑estate partnership, claimed ownership of a 19,250 sq m open space in Miramar, Goa, based on a 1977 deed and sought a writ to restrain the Government of Goa and the Panaji Municipal Corporation from undertaking developmental works on the land. The High Court dismissed the …

PATASI DEVIversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2012 INSC 358Appeal(s) allowed

Patasi Devi owned a 14-kanal plot on which she had constructed a house before the Haryana Government issued a Section 4 notification on 15‑12‑2006 for acquiring land for the development of Sector 36, Rohtak. The land was later declared acquired under Section 6 and an award was passed on 9‑12‑2009, …

AZIM AHMAD KAZMI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2012 INSC 286Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a dispute where the Uttar Pradesh Government, under a lease deed dated 19 March 1996, cancelled the lease of a plot in Allahabad and resumed possession for public purposes such as extending the High Court building. The lessees challenged the cancellation, alleging …

GIRIMALLAPPAversusTHE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER M & MIP & ANR

2012 INSC 287Dismissed

The petitioner’s 11‑acre land in Gobbur village was acquired under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and initially awarded a market value of Rs. 3,800 per acre. He later sought a higher valuation through a Section 28‑A application, a remedy intended only for poor and inarticulate …

HARYANA STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.versusMAWASI & ORS. ETC.ETC.

2012 INSC 257Dismissed

The Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation (HSIDC) sought review of a Supreme Court judgment that fixed compensation for land acquired for an industrial township, alleging that the market value was based on a fraudulent sale deed (Exhibit P1) between two companies allegedly under common …

CHHANGA SINGH AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2012 INSC 206Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and they were awarded compensation and a solatium by the Reference Court in 2001, but no interest was granted on the solatium. During execution proceedings they claimed interest on the solatium, which the execution court and the …

MEHRAWAL KHEWAJI TRUST (REGO.), FARIDKOT & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2012 INSC 190Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the compensation awarded for 33 acres of land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appellants argued that the reference court erred by averaging several sale exemplars instead of using the highest bona‑fide transaction (Exhibit A‑61) and by not granting …

PREMJI NATHUversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER

2012 INSC 166Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Premji Nathu, challenged the compensation awarded for his land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. After the Collector issued a notice under s.12(2) on 22‑Feb‑1985 without attaching a copy of the award, the appellant obtained the award later and filed an application on …

MULCHAND KHANUMAL KHATRIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

2012 INSC 151Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a joint owner of land in Palanpur, Gujarat, challenged a government acquisition of his property and obtained interim relief from the Gujarat High Court. While the proceedings were pending, the Land Acquisition Act was amended in 1984 inserting Section 11A, which mandates that an award …

RAM DHARI JINDAL MEMORIAL TRUSTversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 141Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi Government issued a notification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire land for the Rohini Residential Scheme, invoking the urgency provisions of Section 17(1) and 17(4) and directing that the objection provisions of Section 5A would not apply. The landowner, Ram Dhari Jindal …

BANGALORE CITY COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 69Dismissed

The Bangalore City Cooperative Housing Society sought acquisition of 207 acres of land for a housing scheme, entering into an agreement with the State Government and an estate agent who was paid over Rs 5 crores to secure the acquisition. The High Court quashed the acquisition, holding that no …

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.versusBHERU SINGH & ORS.

2012 INSC 65Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the entitlement of displaced families from the Man Dam project in Madhya Pradesh to receive two hectares of land under the State's Rehabilitation and Resettlement (R&R) Policy. The High Court had directed that each adult son who became a major before the acquisition …

DARSHAN LAL NAGPAL (DEAD) BY L.RS.versusGOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS

2012 INSC 1Appeal(s) allowed

The Delhi government sought to acquire 80 bighas 15 biswas of land, including 21 bighas 3 biswas belonging to the appellants, for a 400/220 KV electric sub‑station. It invoked Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, dispensing with the hearing provisions of Section 5A(2) on the …

RAGHBIR SINGH SEHRAWATversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 816Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a farmer, challenged the acquisition of his agricultural land by the State of Haryana, alleging that the statutory notices under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were not properly published, he was denied a hearing, and that possession of his land was never actually taken because crops …

CHANDRASHEKAR (D) BY LRS. & ORS.versusLAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & ANR.

2011 INSC 815Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the quantum of deductions to be made from the market value of a large tract of undeveloped agricultural land acquired for a residential layout, where the market value was derived from a sale of a small, fully developed plot. The Court clarified that deductions for …

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD.versusJAGGA SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH L.RS.& ANR.

2011 INSC 801Dismissed

In 1983 the Punjab government acquired 29.68 acres of land in Bhatinda for employee housing of National Fertilizers Ltd (NFL) under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The landowners challenged the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector, leading the Additional District Judge to fix …

RAMJI VEERJI PATEL & ORS.versusREVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER & ORS.

2011 INSC 780Dismissed

The appellants owned 1.45 acres of land on which they had raised the level, built a structure and operated a saw‑mill that was their sole livelihood. The Tamil Nadu Government, acting on a requisition by Cholan Roadways Corporation Ltd., issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land …

SHRI GIRISH VYAS & ANR. .versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2011 INSC 756Disposed off

The case concerned a 3,450‑sq‑metre plot (FP No.110) in Pune that was originally reserved for a garden and later for a primary school under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (MRTP Act). After the land was acquired, the developer, who was the son‑in‑law of the then Chief Minister, …

GOA HOUSING BOARDversusRAMESHCHANDRA GOVIND PAWASKAR & ANR.

2011 INSC 738Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the compensation payable for land acquired from a tenant who held the land under the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964. The land was subject to a statutory prohibition under Section 2 of the Goa Land Use (Regulation) Act, 1991, which barred any …

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESHversusNARMADA BACHAO ANDOLAN & ANR.

2011 INSC 723Disposed off

The State of Madhya Pradesh sought to abandon land acquisition of 284.03 hectares in five villages, prompting Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) to argue that the abandonment order was void because the land had already been taken into possession. The Supreme Court, after a spot inspection ordered by it, …

M/S. ROYAL ORCHID HOTELS LIMITED AND ANOTHERversusG. JAYARAM REDDY AND ORS.

2011 INSC 726Dismissed

The Karnataka State Tourism Development Corporation acquired 37 acres of land for a golf‑cum‑hotel resort under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but later transferred portions of the land to private entities. Several landowners challenged the acquisition, alleging fraud and diversion of public …

SHRI AMBYA KALYA MHATRE (D) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS & ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2011 INSC 670Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, heirs of Ambya Kalya Mhatre, owned land acquired for the New Bombay project and were awarded compensation by the Special Land Acquisition Officer. Dissatisfied, they applied under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a reference to the civil court, initially seeking only …

KOLKATA METROPOLITAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusGOBINDA CHANDRA MAKAL & ANR

2011 INSC 641Case Partly allowed

The Kolkata Metropolitan Development Authority and the State of West Bengal sought compensation for three parcels of land (two agricultural and one marsh) acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The respondents challenged the award, arguing that the valuation should be based on recent sales …

SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER .versusMAHARANI BISWAL AND ORS.

2011 INSC 606Disposed off

The Special Land Acquisition Officer fixed compensation of Rs.3,100 per acre for land acquired under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The landowners challenged this amount; the reference court raised it to Rs.10,000 per acre, and the High Court further increased it to Rs.75,000 per acre. …

CHAKASversusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2011 INSC 607Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the compensation payable to land owners whose 550.03 acres were acquired by the State of Punjab for an industrial focal point. It held that the appropriate market value (base price) must be determined using the sale deed Ext. P.8, which was a genuine transaction close to …

MANOHAR LAL (D) BY LRS.versusUGRASEN (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2011 INSC 608Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined a review petition challenging its earlier order that quashed an allotment of land made by the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh to the predecessor‑in‑interest of the petitioners under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The State Government's land policy allowed aggrieved …

DEVENDER KUMAR TYAGI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

2011 INSC 602Case Allowed

The petitioners challenged two notifications issued by the State of Uttar Pradesh for acquiring land to develop a Leather City Project aimed at relocating polluting bone mills. The Court examined whether the declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 18 December 2007, was made …

M/S. DELHI AIRTECH SERVICES PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ANR.

2011 INSC 590Matter referred to larger bench

The case concerned the acquisition of abadi land in Gautam Budh Nagar for the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The State issued a notification invoking Section 17 (emergency powers) and took possession of the land on 4 February 2003 without, according …

K.T. PLANTATION PVT. LTD. & ANRversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA

2011 INSC 554Dismissed

The case concerned lands in the Roerich estate that were exempted from Karnataka's Land Reforms Act, 1961 under Section 107 for linaloe cultivation. The State Government withdrew this exemption by issuing a notification under Section 110 of the Act in 1994, and later enacted the Roerich and Devika …

RAJIV SARIN & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.

2011 INSC 553

The appellants, heirs of a zamindar, challenged a Gazette notification under Section 4‑A of the Kumaun and Uttarakhand Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1960 (KUZALR Act) that vested their 1,600 acres of forest land in the State on 1 January 1978. They argued that the vesting was …

DEVENDRA SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2011 INSC 541

The appellants owned land that the Uttar Pradesh government sought to acquire for the construction of a district jail. The State invoked Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to dispense with the hearing provision of Section 5‑A, claiming urgency. The High Court upheld the …

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANRversusMEDHA PATKAR & ORS.

2011 INSC 531Disposed off

After the completion of the Indira Sagar and Omkareshwar dams, the Madhya Pradesh government initiated land acquisition for canal construction under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Medha Patkar and other petitioners challenged the acquisition, arguing that the Command Area Development (CAD) plans …

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYversusS.S. AGGARWAL & ORS.

2011 INSC 540Disposed off

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 …

VALLIYAMMAL AND ANOTHERversusSPECIAL TEHSILDAR (LAND ACQUISITION) AND ANOTHER ETC.

2011 INSC 530Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of small parcels of land acquired by the Tamil Nadu Government for a housing project, challenged the compensation fixed by the Reference Court after the Madras High Court reduced the market value by applying a 40% deduction for development charges and a further 20% deduction …

NARMADA BACHAO ANDOLANversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

2011 INSC 516Dismissed

The appellant, Narmada Bachao Andolan, challenged the amendment dated 7 June 1991 to Clause 5.1 of the 1991 Resettlement and Rehabilitation (R&R) Policy for the Upper Beda dam project in Madhya Pradesh, alleging it was ultra vires, arbitrary and violated the right of oustees to land in lieu of …

FIDA HUSSAIN & ORS.versusMORADABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.

2011 INSC 501Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined appeals by land owners from the villages of Harthala and Mukkarrabpur who sought enhancement of compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer had fixed modest rates, which were later enhanced by a reference court, but the High …

JALANDHAR IMPROVEMENT TRUSTversusVINOD KUMAR AND ORS.

2011 INSC 494Appeal(s) allowed

The Jalandhar Improvement Trust claimed ownership of 2½ kanals of land that forms part of a 55‑acre development scheme acquired by a 1977 award. The respondents, displaced persons from Pakistan, asserted that the land was evacuee property and sought proprietary rights, contending that the Trust’s …

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ANR.versusM.K. RAFIQ SAHEB

2011 INSC 453Disposed off

The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) appealed against the High Court's enhancement of compensation awarded to M.K. Rafiq Saheb for the acquisition of 34 guntas of land. The Supreme Court examined whether the land, though recorded as agricultural, had effectively ceased to be agricultural and …

NARMADA BACHAO ANDOLANversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR.

2011 INSC 379Disposed off

The Supreme Court heard appeals by the State of Madhya Pradesh and the Narmada Hydro Development Corporation challenging the High Court's interim orders in a public‑interest litigation filed by Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) concerning the Omkareshwar Dam. NBA sought land‑for‑land rehabilitation, …

TRISHALA JAIN AND ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANR.

2011 INSC 360Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined several appeals arising from a common land acquisition notification for a Government Polytechnic in Uttaranchal. It held that the Special Land Acquisition Officer's use of the belting system was improper because the land was uniformly placed and intended for a single …

PRAHLAD SINGH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 344Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' land in Haryana was notified for acquisition in 2002 and an award was passed in 2004 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They filed writ petitions alleging that the land fell within a green belt under the Regional Plan 2001, that the acquisition violated the National Capital Region …

BANDA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, BANDAversusMOTI LAL AGARWAL AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 331Appeal(s) allowed

The State Government acquired 103 bighas of land in Banda district for the Tulsi Nagar Residential Scheme under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, issuing a notification on 8‑9‑1998 and a declaration on 7‑9‑1999. The acquisition was completed with possession handed over to the Banda Development …

U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHADversusSHEO NARAIN KUSHWAHA & ORS.

2011 INSC 329Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, sought to acquire land belonging to the respondents and challenged the Reference Court's award of Rs.1,10,250 per bigha as compensation, up from Rs.10,250 per bigha. The Allahabad High Court dismissed the appeal summarily without reasons, invoking Order …

V. RAMAKRISHNA RAOversusSINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LTD. & ANR.

2011 INSC 323Case Allowed

The appellant, V. Ramakrishna Rao, filed an application under Section 28A(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 seeking correction of the market value and compensation awarded for land acquisition. The Supreme Court had earlier allowed the appeal, reversing the Andhra Pradesh High Court and holding …

SRI RADHY SHYAM (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2011 INSC 304Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh, through the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, acquired land belonging to the appellants for a planned industrial development of Gautam Budh Nagar, invoking Sections 17(1) and 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, thereby dispensing with the hearing …

THE COMMISSIONER, CORPORATION OF CHENNAIversusR. SIVASANKARA MEHTA AND ANOTHER

2011 INSC 294Appeal(s) allowed

The land in question was acquired in 1949 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and vested in the State in 1962, later being transferred to the Chennai Municipal Corporation. In 1995 the Government ordered reconveyance of a portion of the land to the original owners, but subsequently cancelled that …

BILKIS AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

2011 INSC 272Case Partly allowed

The appellants' land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a tourism development project, and an award of Rs.300 per acre was initially made. The Reference Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.650 per acre, noting that the land had been converted to non‑agricultural use and had …

SHANTA TALWAR & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2011 INSC 270Dismissed

The appellants challenged the acquisition of land for the Prem Nagar Metro station, arguing that the Metro Railways (Construction of Works) Act, 1978, being a special law, should exclusively govern such acquisitions and that the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was impliedly repealed. The respondents …

SYED MAQBOOL ALIversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.

2011 INSC 263Appeal(s) allowed

The State acquired land in 1982 for a road and paid compensation to certain owners, but the appellant claimed that his plots were taken without any legal acquisition. After a complaint to the Lokayukta was dismissed as time‑barred, he filed a writ petition in 2000 seeking acquisition of the disputed …

DEV SHARAN & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2011 INSC 188Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh sought to acquire 25.89 hectares of agricultural land in Murchha village for the construction of a district jail, issuing notifications under Sections 4 and 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 21 August 2008 and dispensing with the Section 5A hearing on the ground of …

IVO AGNELO SANTIMANO FERNANDES & ORS.versusGOVERNMENT OF GOA & ANR.

2011 INSC 151Appeal(s) allowed

In a land acquisition proceeding, the government paid compensation by issuing cheques to four owners, two of which remained uncollected and were subsequently deposited in the State's revenue account and utilized. The owners filed an execution application seeking the balance amount and interest, …

BRIJ PAL BHARGAVA & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2011 INSC 154Dismissed

The appellants owned 6.6 acres of land in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, which was acquired by the State under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 through notifications under Sections 4 and 6. They challenged the acquisition on two grounds: that they were not afforded a hearing under Section 5‑A before their …

UNION OF INDIA ETC.versusGIANI

2011 INSC 132Case Partly allowed

The Union of India appealed against a High Court order that awarded land owners compensation under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The acquisition proceedings began in 1965 and the Collector's award was passed on 9 July 1980, before the amendment (Act 68 of 1984) that introduced …

STATE OF PUNJABversusAMARJIT SINGH AND ANR.

2011 INSC 107Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Punjab appealed against an order of the Executing Court that allowed the respondents, whose land had been acquired, to claim the additional amount under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on both the market value of the land and the solatium payable under Section 23(2). …

M. NAGABHUSHANAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS

2011 INSC 92Dismissed

The appellant, owner of two plots of land, challenged the acquisition of his land under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, alleging that the land lay outside the Framework Agreement and that the acquisition was invalid because no award was made within two years as required by …

GIRNAR TRADERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2011 INSC 26Reference answered

The case concerned a parcel of land in Jalgaon reserved for a development plan under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act, 1966. The appellant claimed that the State Government and Municipal Council failed to acquire the land within the time limits prescribed by the MRTP Act and …

BRIJ MOHAN & ORS.versusHARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.

2011 INSC 2Case Partly allowed

The appellants' lands were acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the development of a city and HUDA formulated a scheme to allot plots to the land losers at "normal allotment rates". The appellants applied for allotment in 1990 and were later allotted plots, but HUDA charged them the …

STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusJASVIR SINGH & ORS.

2010 INSC 826Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a writ petition filed by landowners challenging the acquisition of their lands under the 1981 notifications of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and seeking fresh notifications and higher compensation. The High Court had repeatedly summoned senior state officials—Principal …

SARUP SINGH AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 816Dismissed

The appellants sought enhanced solatium (30% instead of 15%) and higher interest rates (9% for the first year and 15% thereafter) under the 1984 amendment to the Land Acquisition Act, claiming that the amendment should apply to their awards which were finalized before the amendment came into force. …

NADIRSHA SHAPURJI PATEL (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusDEPUTY COLLECTOR AND LA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 792Disposed off

The State of Gujarat acquired land in Mora village for a gas‑based thermal power project under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land acquisition officer initially fixed compensation at Rs 3.50 per square metre, which was enhanced to Rs 20 by the reference court and further to Rs 22 by the High …

THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION C.M.D.AversusJ. SIVAPRAKASAM & ORS.

2010 INSC 788Appeal(s) allowed

The Special Deputy Collector of the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority sought to acquire 4.89 acres of land for the Koyambedu Wholesale Market Complex, issuing a preliminary notification under Section 4(1) and a final declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The …

PRABHAKAR RAGHUNATH PATIL AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

2010 INSC 771Case Partly allowed

The appellants, owners of land and structures acquired by the State of Maharashtra under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenged the compensation awarded by the reference court, seeking higher rates for both open land and the structures. The High Court upheld the reference court's valuation of …

RAMJAS FOUNDATION AND ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 763Dismissed

The Ramjas Foundation owned land in Delhi that was acquired under a 1959 notification issued under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for planned development. The Foundation claimed the land was a Wakf property, exempt under clause (d) of the notification, and argued that a non‑Muslim could create a …

TAMIL NADU HOUSING BOARD, CHENNAIversusM. MEIYAPPAN AND ORS.

2010 INSC 754Appeal(s) allowed

The Tamil Nadu Government acquired land in 1979 for low‑income housing and awarded compensation on 28 April 1982. The land owners (respondents Nos. 1‑17) filed a writ petition in December 1997, more than 15 years after the award, challenging the acquisition. The Madras High Court entertained the …

D. HANUMANTH SA & ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.

2010 INSC 745Disposed off

The State of Karnataka issued preliminary and final notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire 3 acres 34 guntas in Kengeri for the construction of an approach road, a workshop and residential quarters for the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, …

CHIMANLAL KUBERDAS MODI (D) BY LRS.versusGUJARAT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORP. & ORS.

2010 INSC 724Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and an award was passed determining a market value. The appellant challenged the award, and the reference court enhanced the market value, granted a 30% solatium, a 12% annual increase, and interest of 9% (later 15%) on the total …

STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.versusMUNIKADIRAPPA & ORS.

2010 INSC 687Disposed off

The respondents, cultivating tenants of lands endowed to a temple, obtained occupancy rights from the Karnataka Land Reforms Tribunal, which the temple challenged before the High Court. While the land was under acquisition by the Bangalore Development Authority, the Single Judge of the High Court …

RADHA MUDALIYARversusSPL. TAHASILDAR (LAND ACQ.), T.N.H. BOARD

2010 INSC 686Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the compensation payable to landowners whose 7.06 acres were acquired by the Tamil Nadu government for the Madras Export Processing Zone. The owners argued that the High Court erred by applying a 40% deduction and failing to grant solatium and interest, while the Reference …

V. RAMAKRISHNA RAOversusTHE SINGARENI COLLIERIES COMPANY LTD. AND ANR.

2010 INSC 670Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant's land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the initial market value was fixed by the Collector. After a reference under Section 18, the Reference Court increased the value, but the appellant, who had not made a Section 18 application, sought equal compensation through …

MOHANLAL NANABHAI CHOKSI (DEAD) BY LRS.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2010 INSC 668Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, owners of land in Surat, challenged the acquisition of their property for a vegetable market initiated by the Surat Municipal Corporation (SMC) under Section 78 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. They argued that the later Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market …

A.P. HOUSING BOARDversusK. MANOHAR REDDY & ORS.

2010 INSC 660Appeal(s) allowed

The Andhra Pradesh Housing Board appealed against the High Court’s order that increased the market value of 84 acres of agricultural land to Rs. 75 per square yard and then deducted one‑third for development charges. The Supreme Court examined the evidence of sale deeds (exhibits A1‑A9) executed …

IYASAMY & ANR.versusSPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LANO ACQUISITION

2010 INSC 662Disposed off

The appellants' land was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the compensation was fixed by the Reference Court at Rs 6 per square foot after a 1/3 deduction for development charges. The Madras High Court upheld this amount and rejected the claim for interest on solatium under s.23(2) …

AMARJIT SINGH & ORS.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

2010 INSC 656Dismissed

The case concerned the expansion of the SAS (Nagar) Mohali township, where land for sectors 81, 88 and 89 was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The State of Punjab invoked Section 178(2) of the Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995 to exempt the acquired land from …

HIRABAI & ORS.versusL.A.O. CUM ASST. COMMNR.

2010 INSC 638Dismissed

The Government of Karnataka issued a preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire irrigated and dry lands belonging to Hirabai and others for a lift irrigation project. The Land Acquisition Officer initially fixed compensation at Rs.15,000 per acre for …

PRALHAD AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 618Case Partly allowed

The land of the appellants was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with a notification dated 5 March 1983 and an award on 1 March 1984. The owners filed a reference under Section 18 for enhanced compensation, and while the reference was pending, the 1984 Amendment Act introduced Section …

GLANROCK ESTATE (P) LTD.versusSTATE OF TAMIL NADU

2010 INSC 589Dismissed

The petitioners, Glanrock Estate Ltd., challenged the validity of the Gudalur Janmam Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1969 (the Janmam Act) after it was placed in the Ninth Schedule by the Constitution (Thirty‑fourth Amendment) Act, 1974. They argued that the Act violated …

NAND KISHORE GUPTA & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2010 INSC 586Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the acquisition of land for the Yamuna Expressway project, where the State of Uttar Pradesh, through YEIDA, acquired over 1,600 hectares for an expressway and 25 million square metres for five industrial parcels. Petitioners argued that the acquisition was not for a public …

K.K. POONACHAversusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

2010 INSC 574Dismissed

The petitioners challenged the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 on the ground that it was not reserved for the President’s consideration and did not receive his assent as required by the now‑repealed Article 31(3). The Supreme Court examined whether the Act, enacted under Entry 5 of List II …

SUDAM SHANKAR KSHIRSAGAR & ANR.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

2010 INSC 555Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act to acquire agricultural land belonging to a Hindu joint family under the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1986. The appellants challenged the acquisition, contending that each …

RAJINDER KISHAN GUPTA AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

2010 INSC 534Dismissed

The appellants challenged a fresh acquisition of their land in Mehrauli, Delhi, undertaken for the construction of the Chattarpur Metro Station. While the Metro Railways (Construction of Works) Act, 1978 provides a special framework for metro projects, the government invoked the urgency provisions …

N. NATESAM PILLAIversusSPL. TAHSILDAR, LAND ACQUISITION, TIRUCHY

2010 INSC 494Case Partly allowed

The Tamil Nadu Government acquired 3.90 acres of land for housing, issuing a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs. 1.72 per sq. ft., which the reference court increased to Rs. 17 per sq. ft. based on the land's potential …

CHATURBHUJA MODI AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ORISSA AND ANR.

2010 INSC 500Dismissed

The appellants challenged the compensation awarded for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High Court had enhanced the compensation to Rs 3,00,000 per acre based primarily on a sale deed (Exhibit 1) dated 4 Oct 1982, while rejecting another sale deed (Exhibit 2) involving a very …

SULOCHANA CHANDRAKANT GALANDEversusPUNE MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT AND ORS.

2010 INSC 466Dismissed

The appellant, Sulochana Chandrakant Galande, challenged the acquisition of her land by the State under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, arguing that the land was not within urban limits at the Act's commencement and that the later repeal of the Act should invalidate the …

ANAND SINGH & ANR.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

2010 INSC 443Dismissed

The Gorakhpur Development Authority (GOA) sought to acquire land for a residential colony and, under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, invoked the urgency clause of Section 17(4) to dispense with the mandatory Section 5A enquiry. The appellants, land owners, challenged the validity of this …

DAHYABHAI RANCHHODDAS DHOBI AND ANR.versusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

2010 INSC 421Dismissed

The appellants, owners of a parcel of land in Surat, challenged the State of Gujarat's acquisition of the land for a primary school, alleging procedural defects under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. They claimed no hearing under Section 5A, no locality publication under Section 6(2), the award under …

MAHANADI COAL FIELDS LTD. & ANR.versusMATHIAS ORAM & ORS.

2010 INSC 409Hearing Adjourned

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd., sought relief from an order of the Orissa High Court directing payment of compensation for lands acquired in 1987 under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957. The lands, belonging to tribal owners, had never been …

LAND ACQN. OFFICER & ASSTT. COMMNR. & ANR.versusSHIVAPPA MALLAPPA JIGALUR & ORS.

2010 INSC 367Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined a large batch of appeals arising from land acquisition proceedings in Karnataka concerning the liability to pay interest on solatium under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The key issue was the interpretation of "closed execution" in Gurpreet Singh v. Union of India and …

MAHESH CHANDRA BANERJIversusU.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD AND ORS.

2010 INSC 366Case Partly allowed

The Banerji family claimed that, apart from 1‑1‑10 bighas of land excluded by the Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Act, the remaining portion of their Plot No. 1002 had been acquired for a development scheme (Yojana No. 7) and that no compensation had been assessed. The State and the Parishad …

MANOHAR LAL (D) BY LRS.versusUGRASEN (D) BY LRS. & ORS.

2010 INSC 341Disposed off

The case concerned allotments of land acquired under the 1894 Land Acquisition Act and the applicability of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. The State Government, acting as a revisional authority, directed the Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA) to allot land to both …

MAY GEORGEversusSPECIAL TAHSILDAR & ORS.

2010 INSC 331Dismissed

May George challenged the award of acquisition of her 33‑cent parcel under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, alleging that she never received the notice required under Section 9(3). The High Court dismissed her writ petition but allowed her to file an application under Section 18. On appeal, the …

BONDU RAMASWAMYversusBANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.

2010 INSC 271Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the legality of land acquisitions undertaken by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) for the Arkavathi layout, focusing on whether the BDA Act required President's assent, was repugnant to the Land Acquisition Act, and complied with constitutional provisions under …

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusKARIGOWDA & ORS.

2010 INSC 242Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined the compensation awarded for land compulsorily acquired for the Hemavathi Dam project, where claimants cultivated mulberry for sericulture. The lower courts had enhanced compensation by treating silk cocoons as an agricultural product and using a capitalization method, …

UDHO DASSversusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2010 INSC 228Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the compensation payable for 162.5 acres of land acquired in 1990 under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a housing project in Sonepat, Haryana. The Collector initially awarded Rs 2 lakh per acre, which was later enhanced by the reference court and the High Court using a …

M/S. JAYABHERI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. AND ORS.versusSTATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS.

2010 INSC 195Disposed off

The State of Andhra Pradesh sought to acquire land for the Outer Ring Road (ORR) project around Hyderabad and Secunderabad. After objections that the original western alignment would cut through water bodies and require extensive rock cutting, an alternative alignment through Narsingi and Poppalguda …

MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BY ITS COMMISSIONERversusVEER KUMAR JAIN & ORS.

2010 INSC 189Appeal(s) allowed

The Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) acquired land for a residential layout, took possession and issued a notification under Section 16(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Later, the State Government issued a notification on 15 September 2001 under Section 48(1) of the same Act, …

SAWARAN LATA ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2010 INSC 190Dismissed

The State of Haryana issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 2 May 2001, followed by a declaration under Section 6 on 30 April 2002, and made an award under Section 11 on 27 April 2004, taking possession of the petitioners' land. The petitioners filed writ …

PREM CHAND & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA

2010 INSC 181Case Partly allowed

The Supreme Court examined an appeal by Prem Chand and others against a Delhi High Court award of Rs 39,300 per bigha as compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where the High Court had denied the benefit under Section 23(1A). The Court held that, because the award was …

SIEL FOODS & FERTILIZERS INDUSTRIESversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2010 INSC 168Dismissed

The Supreme Court reviewed petitions filed by polluting industries that had been ordered to surrender portions of their land for green belts after relocation from Delhi. The petitioners argued that the Delhi Development Authority (ODA) must acquire the surrendered land under Section 15 of the Delhi …

THAKUR KULDEEP SINGH (D) THR. L.R. & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2010 INSC 131Dismissed

The appellants owned a 2,475‑sq‑yd plot in Karol Bagh, Delhi, which the Union of India acquired for the public purpose of constructing Joshi Memorial Hospital. The Land Acquisition Collector fixed the market value at Rs 550 per sq yd, which the appellants challenged under Section 18 of the Land …

BHAGWAN DAS & ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF UP & ORS.

2010 INSC 127Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants' land was acquired for a market yard and an award was made by the Land Acquisition Collector on 14 March 2007, but they were not served notice of the award until 25 October 2007 and only became aware of its contents on 16 November 2007. They filed an application under Section 18 of …

SANGUNTHALA (DEAD) THR. LRS.versusSPECIAL TEHSILDAR (L.A.) & ORS.

2010 INSC 119Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the compensation awarded for 196 acres of land acquired for the expansion of Tamil Nadu Magnesite Limited under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants argued that the land, although used agriculturally, was a potential house site and should be valued at Rs 1,75,000 …

HARI RAM & ANR.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

2010 INSC 97Appeal(s) allowed

The Haryana government issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to acquire 184.56 acres for an urban mini‑estate, leading many landowners to file objections and writ petitions. While the High Court released the lands of 22 owners, the appellants' lands remained under …