Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

West Bengal Housing Board Act, 1972

5 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

URMILA ROY & ORS.versusM/S.BENGAL PEERLESS HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD. & ORS.

2009 INSC 38923 March 2009Dismissed

The appellants, who owned land intended for an international school and other projects, challenged the State's acquisition of their land for a housing scheme that was to be executed by a private joint‑sector company, Bengal Peerless. The High Court initially set aside the acquisition, but a Division Bench later upheld

BENGAL AMBUJA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LTD.versusPRAMILA SANFUI AND ORS.

2015 INSC 67418 September 2015Disposed off

The West Bengal Housing Board (appellant) purchased a 20.184‑acre plot from the legal heirs of late Gangadas Pal, who were intermediaries under the West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act, 1953. The heirs had earlier been parties to a partition suit (Title Suit No. 121 of 1962) that was later amended to include the plot, a

STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.versusSAMARENDRA NATH PAUL AND ORS.

1997 INSC 5489 July 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State of West Bengal sought to requisition two plots of land for a housing project under Section 3(1) of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948. The owners challenged the requisition, alleging that the statutory notice was not served as required by Rule 3 of the 1948 Rules, specifically that t

WEST BENGAL HOUSING BOARDversusBHAWAN LAL MUNDHRA AND ORS .

1997 INSC 5499 July 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The West Bengal Housing Board sought to acquire 0.63 acres of land belonging to Brijendra Lal Mundhra for a housing project for weaker sections, which included an approach road, market complex, clinic and drainage. The land was requisitioned under the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1948, and notice

WEST BENGAL HOUSING BOARD AND ORS.versusBRIJENDRA PRASAD GUPTA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 5529 July 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The West Bengal Housing Board, acting through a joint‑sector company, requisitioned and later acquired 1.82 acres of land to build a housing scheme for low‑ and middle‑income groups. The petitioners, who had purchased the land but whose names were not yet entered in the Record of Rights, claimed that the requisition no

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