Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
11 judgments · newest first · showing 1–11
The petitioners, heirs of the deceased CG Kadam, entered into a 1992 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with developers, granting the developers rights to develop part of a 42,669.40 sq m plot while reserving a 37,865 sq ft floor‑space index (FSI) for the petitioners. The developers obtained a …
The appellant, S. Kesari Hanuman Goud, filed a suit for specific performance of a 1977 agreement to sell land, asserting that he was always ready and willing to fulfil his part of the contract. The respondent, Anjum Jehan, contended that the appellant lacked the financial capacity and therefore was …
Gwalior Sugar Co. Ltd., a private limited company, was granted 215 bighas of land in 1941-42 for setting up a sugar factory, with pattas prohibiting agricultural use. Facing financial difficulties, the company sold about 9 bighas of surplus land, leading to a public interest litigation alleging …
The appellants, original owners of land declared surplus under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, 1976, challenged the allotment of that land to weaker sections. An earlier appeal against the surplus declaration was dismissed in 1988, but the appellants later filed another appeal in 1995, suppressing the …
The Lucknow Development Authority acquired a large tract of land for a housing scheme and the Special Land Acquisition Officer fixed its market value at Rs.2.20 per sq. ft., later increased to Rs.6 per sq. ft. by the acquisition tribunal after considering sale deeds of small plots. The landowners …
The case involved two related suits concerning a plot of land: one for recovery of possession and a permanent injunction, and another for specific performance of an alleged oral agreement of sale. The plaintiff claimed the defendants had constructed a compound wall on his plot, while the defendants …
Munna Lal filed a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale of land, which was dismissed by the trial court. The appeal against the dismissal was allowed ex‑parte by the first appellate court, and the appellant sought to set aside the ex‑parte decree under Order XLI Rule 21 of the CPC. …
Jayantilal Investments, a promoter, was sued by MadhuVihar Co‑operative Housing Society for conveyance of title and an injunction restraining further construction on a plot in Kandivali. The Society argued that under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA) the promoter must obtain flat‑takers' …
The promoters of a proposed company purchased a house and land before incorporation and later transferred the title to the incorporated company, which was declared the owner by a decree. The promoters, acting as directors, subsequently entered into a sale agreement with the appellants and also …
The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation sought to remove unauthorised hutments erected by pavement‑dwellers on a main road. The High Court stayed the removal until suitable accommodation was provided and required a hearing. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that pavements are public property intended …
The Supreme Court examined whether the surplus lands owned by Shree Sitaram Mills formed part of the "assets in relation to the textile undertaking" under sub‑section (2) of section 3 of the Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1983. The mill, a sick textile undertaking, had been …
