Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976

17 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

S. V ASUDEVETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.

1993 INSC 12330 March 1993Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners challenged the Karnataka State Government's orders permitting a partnership firm to sell excess vacant land under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976, alleging that the State lacked authority to grant such exemption and that the sale deed was void. The Supreme Court examined the scheme of th

M. MEENAKSHI AND ORS.versusMETADIN AGARWAL(D) BY LRS. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 56229 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The defendants, owners of excess land under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976, entered into a sale agreement with the plaintiffs that was expressly conditioned on obtaining a statutory sanction. The competent authority refused the sanction, stating that no 1,000 sq. metres of vacant land were available fo

D. K. SONIversusP.K. MUKERJEE AND ORS.

1987 INSC 29527 October 1987Dismissed

The appellant, D.K. Soni, a tenant, challenged an order allowing the landlord, P.K. Mukerjee, to evict him on the ground of personal need under the U.P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act. The landlord obtained a final permission for eviction before the 1972 Urban Buildings Act came into force, and later execut

PUNE MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

2007 INSC 21526 February 2007Appeal(s) allowed

The Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) was allotted land declared excess under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 after the State vested the land in it and the corporation paid the occupancy price. The land owners had earlier filed a statement under Section 6, received a final order under Section 8 and a not

K.NARENDRAversusRIVIERA APARTMENTS (P) LTD.

1999 INSC 26524 May 1999Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, K. Narendra, entered into a 1972 agreement to sell a 4,000 sq m plot to Riviera Apartments (P) Ltd for Rs 8,97,740, contingent on the buyer obtaining various governmental sanctions for a multi‑storey project. The buyer failed to secure the required approvals, part of the land was later declared excess un

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusDEV RAJ GUPTA AND ORS.

1990 INSC 32123 October 1990Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India leased a parcel of land at 20 Barakhamba Road to various lessees who later sought to convert its use from residential to commercial. The lessees sent several letters enquiring about charges, but only on 27 February 1981 did they file a proper application in the prescribed form signed by all co‑lessee

SOMNATH CHAKRABORTY AND ANR.versusAPPOLLO GLENEAGLES HOSPITALS LTD. & ORS.

2014 INSC 50323 July 2014Disposed off

The appellants, Somnath Chakraborty and others, owned 11.659 cottah of land that was later notified as surplus under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976. The State of West Bengal leased the land to Appollo Gleneagles Hospitals Ltd. for 30 years. The appellants challenged the notification, and the Calcutta H

STATE OF U.P.versusSHER SINGH AND ORS.

1996 INSC 150417 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Uttar Pradesh filed a suit under Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 seeking a declaration that the respondent, Ram Het, held vacant urban land in excess of the prescribed ceiling. The competent authority found an excess of 1,146.0430 sq m and the matter was appealed before the Dis

SHANTISTAR BUILDERSversusNARAYAN KHIMALAL GOTAME AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 75317 November 1995Disposed off

The Supreme Court had earlier directed the State Government to set up a committee, including an Additional District Judge, to monitor the allotment of houses to weaker sections under a scheme exempted under section 21 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976. The State filed an affidavit seeking to modify thi

MUKKARRAM ALI KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.

2007 INSC 75413 July 2007Appeal(s) allowed

Mukkarram Ali Khan appealed against an order of the appellate authority under the Urban Land Ceiling Regulation Act, 1976, contending that the issues had already been decided by a prior order. The High Court refused to interfere, holding that the point was not raised before it. The appellant submitted an affidavit show

STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ETC.versusL.J. JOHNSON AND ANOTHER ETC.

1983 INSC 1168 September 1983Disposed off

The State of Uttar Pradesh challenged the refusal of a competent authority to permit L.J. Johnson to sell a portion of his 2,530 sq m parcel, which included a small building, on the ground that the total area exceeded the 2,000 sq m ceiling for Category D urban land under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976

NANDKISHORE LALBHAI MEHTAversusNEW ERA FABRICS PVT. LTD. & ORS.

2015 INSC 4908 July 2015Dismissed

The appellant, Nandkishore Lalbhai Mehta, entered into a sale agreement with the respondents for a plot in Mahim, subject to obtaining consent from the Mill Mazdoor Sabha (labour union) and various statutory permissions. The union refused consent, and the respondents declared the agreement cancelled and offered to retu

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.versusSWAIKA PROPERTIES & ANR.

1985 INSC 778 April 1985Appeal(s) allowed

The Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 authorized the acquisition of land in Jaipur for a public development scheme. A notice under s.52(2) was served on the respondents at their Calcutta office, and the land was later vested in the State of Rajasthan by a notification under s.52(1). The respondents filed a writ pet

KISHORSINH RATANSINH JADEJAversusMARUTI CORP. & ORS.

2009 INSC 4576 April 2009Disposed off

The appellants, owners of agricultural land, entered into an agreement in 1980 for a cooperative housing project that later failed, leading the respondent Maruti Corp. to sue for specific performance in 1999. While the Gujarat High Court admitted the appeal and initially ordered that any dealing with the property would

RATIAN KUMAR TANDON AND ORS.versusSTATE OF UTIAR PRADESH

1996 INSC 8161 August 1996Dismissed

The appellants, R.K. Tandon and others, held lease‑hold rights over 22,528 sq. yd of land in Allahabad that was acquired by the State under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation of Rs 4,57,750.88; the reference court fixed Rs 500 per sq. yd for land, Rs 50,000 for trees and R

DATTATRYA SHANKARBHAT AMBALGI & ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

1989 INSC 2181 August 1989Dismissed

The petitioners, owners of land in Sholapur, challenged the acquisition of their land under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976, arguing that the Act should not apply to land reserved for public purpose under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 and that sections 10, 11 and 23 of the Act vio

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search