Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
36 judgments · newest first · showing 1–36
The Gujarat State Election Commission sought to stay the by‑elections for two councilor seats in Devgadh Bariya Municipality, arguing that the removal of the incumbents under Section 3 of the Gujarat Provisions of Disqualification of Members of Local Authorities for Defection Act, 1986 was being …
The petitioners, M/s Dineshchandra Aquatech JV, filed an application under the Arbitration Act No. 90 of 2026 seeking the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve their dispute with M/s Synerzez Solutions Private Limited. The parties could not agree on the name of an arbitrator despite being willing …
M/s Dineshchandra Aquatech JV filed a petition under the Arbitration Act No. 88 of 2026 seeking appointment of an arbitrator to resolve its dispute with M/s Turbotech Infranet Private Limited. The parties agreed to the appointment of an arbitrator but could not agree on the individual's name. The …
The National Dairy Development Board filed a petition under the Arbitration Act No. 147 of 2025 against Dia Fresh (Sridhar Sudanagunta, Sole Proprietor). The court reviewed the mediation report and, upon joint request of the parties' counsel, decided to refer the dispute to arbitration. The petition …
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 High Court of Gujarat dismissed an intra‑court appeal filed by Mehsana District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd challenging a single judge's order that found the bank and its officers in contempt for executing a sale deed after an interim stay order. The interim order of 07‑01‑2021 had stayed the …
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 …
The petitioners, owners of land acquired under the National Highways Act, challenged an award dated 30.05.2020 which had determined market value using the multiplication factor‑2 under Section 26(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and …
The petitioners, owners of land acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956, challenged an award dated 08.01.2020 that computed market value using the multiplication factor 2 under Section 26(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and …
The petitioners challenged an award dated 28‑09‑2020 in which the market value of land acquired under the National Highways Act was computed using the multiplication factor 2 under Section 26(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement …
The legal heirs of the late Gohil Bhagavandas sought the benefit of Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, i.e., an additional 12% compensation on the market value of land that had been determined using the …
The petitioners, Hemanshu Mahasukhbai Bhatt & ors., filed a special civil application before the High Court of Gujarat seeking permission to withdraw the petition and to file a fresh petition with better particulars. The learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms. Shalini S. Mair, made the request. The …
The petitioners challenged an award dated 28‑09‑2020 for land acquired under the National Highways Act, alleging that the award failed to grant the 12% additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement …
The petitioners, land owners affected by a National Highways acquisition, claimed they were denied the additional compensation of 12% per annum under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, calculated on the …
The petitioners, a large group of land owners, challenged the award dated 30.01.2020 for failing to grant them the 12% additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act) on the …
The petitioners challenged an award dated 08.01.2020 under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which had applied the multiplication factor 2 under Section 26(2) to determine market value but had granted the additional …
The petitioners, a large group of land owners, challenged the award dated 15‑01‑2020 which computed the market value of their land using the multiplication factor 2 under Section 26(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, …
The petitioners, a group of land owners, challenged the award dated 28‑09‑2020 for land acquired under the National Highways Act, alleging that the additional compensation of 12% per annum under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and …
The petitioners challenged an award dated 15‑01‑2020 under the National Highways Act, 1956, which had computed the market value of their land using the multiplication factor 2 prescribed in Section 26(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and …
The petitioners, a group of land owners, challenged the award dated 08.01.2020 for failing to grant the 12% additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (RFCTLARR Act) on the market value …
The petitioners, legal heirs of the late Gohil, challenged an award dated 08‑01‑2020 that computed the market value of land acquired under the National Highways Act using the multiplication factor 2 under Section 26(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, …
The petitioners, heirs of land owners whose property was acquired for a national highway, claimed that the award dated 23‑02‑2018 failed to grant them the 12 % additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and …
The petitioners challenged the award dated 30.05.2020 for land acquired under the National Highways Act, alleging that the additional compensation of 12% per annum under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 …
The petitioners challenged an award dated 30‑May‑2020 that failed to grant the 12% additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 on the market value calculated with the multiplication …
The petitioners challenged the award dated 23‑02‑2018 for failing to grant the 12 % additional compensation under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (the 2013 Act) on the market value that includes the …
The petitioners, land owners whose lands were acquired for a national highway, challenged the award dated 30.05.2020 for not granting the additional compensation of 12% per annum under Section 30(3) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and …
The petitioners sought to uphold revenue entries relating to land transferred by a 1985 will and subsequent sale deeds, arguing that the will did not constitute a prohibited transfer under Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948. The Collector, invoking Section 84C, …
The petitioners sought to uphold revenue entries relating to land transferred by a 1985 will and subsequent sale deeds, arguing that the will did not constitute a prohibited transfer under Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948. The Collector, invoking Section 84C, …
The petitioners sought to uphold revenue entries relating to land transferred by a 1985 will and subsequent sale deeds, arguing that the will did not constitute a prohibited transfer under Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948. The Collector, invoking Section 84C, …
The petitioners sought to uphold revenue entries relating to land transferred by a 1985 will and subsequent sale deeds, arguing that the will did not constitute a prohibited transfer under Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948. The Collector, invoking Section 84C, …
The petitioners sought to overturn the Collector’s order cancelling six revenue entries relating to land transferred by will and subsequent sale deeds, alleging that the will did not constitute a prohibited transfer under Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948. The …
The petitioners sought to uphold revenue entries relating to land transferred by a 1985 will and subsequent sale deeds, arguing that the will did not constitute a prohibited transfer under Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948. The Collector, invoking Section 84C, …
The heirs of the deceased landowner challenged the acquisition of a right of way for a water pipeline laid across their land under the Gujarat Water and Gas Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 2000. They alleged procedural violations, denial of a proper hearing, and sought …
The appellants, a group of eight students, challenged the cancellation of their admission to the First Year BHMS programme for the academic year 2022-2023 by the principal of Valan Homeopathic Medical College. They filed a civil application seeking interim relief to appear for examinations during …
