Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.61 seconds)
Gautam Kamat Hotels Pvt Ltd vs Bangalore Development Authority on 8 August, 2012 cites

Banda Development Authy, Banda vs Moti Lal Agarwal & Ors on 26 April, 2011

28. Neither the mahazar nor the statement of objections states that the owners of the lands in question were called upon to hand over the possession or to be present at the spot for witnessing the take over by the respondents. The Apex Court's judgment in the case of BANDA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (supra) does not come to the rescue of the respondents in any way. In the said case, the said Authority, after taking the possession of the acquired lands, constructed the roads, nalas, laid pipelines, erected the electrical polls and lights, carved out plots and allotted them to the people belonging to different categories. In the instant case, it is not even the case of the respondents that the land in question was developed by the B.D.A. in any way after 30.05.1998 on which date they claim to have taken the possession.
Supreme Court of India Cites 48 - Cited by 181 - G S Singhvi - Full Document

Balwant Narayan Bhagde vs M. D. Bhagwat & Ors on 23 April, 1975

After making reference to the judgments in Balwant Narayan Bhagde vs. M.D.Bhagwat, Balmok and Khatri Educational and Industrial Trust vs. State of Punjab, P.K.Kalburqi vs. State of Karnataka, NTPC Ltd., vs. Mahesh Dutta, Sita Ram Bhandar Society vs. Government of NCET of Delhi, Omprakash Verma vs. State of A.P. and Naharsingh vs. State of U.P. this Court laid down the following principles: (Banda Development Authority case, SCC Page 411, para 37)
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 227 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Balmokand Khatri Educational ... vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 14 February, 1996

After making reference to the judgments in Balwant Narayan Bhagde vs. M.D.Bhagwat, Balmok and Khatri Educational and Industrial Trust vs. State of Punjab, P.K.Kalburqi vs. State of Karnataka, NTPC Ltd., vs. Mahesh Dutta, Sita Ram Bhandar Society vs. Government of NCET of Delhi, Omprakash Verma vs. State of A.P. and Naharsingh vs. State of U.P. this Court laid down the following principles: (Banda Development Authority case, SCC Page 411, para 37)
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 132 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

K.P.M. Basheer Etc vs State Of Karnataka And Anr. Etc on 28 February, 1992

After making reference to the judgments in Balwant Narayan Bhagde vs. M.D.Bhagwat, Balmok and Khatri Educational and Industrial Trust vs. State of Punjab, P.K.Kalburqi vs. State of Karnataka, NTPC Ltd., vs. Mahesh Dutta, Sita Ram Bhandar Society vs. Government of NCET of Delhi, Omprakash Verma vs. State of A.P. and Naharsingh vs. State of U.P. this Court laid down the following principles: (Banda Development Authority case, SCC Page 411, para 37)
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 78 - S R Pandian - Full Document

National Thermal Power Corpn.Ltd vs Mahesh Dutta And Ors on 16 July, 2009

After making reference to the judgments in Balwant Narayan Bhagde vs. M.D.Bhagwat, Balmok and Khatri Educational and Industrial Trust vs. State of Punjab, P.K.Kalburqi vs. State of Karnataka, NTPC Ltd., vs. Mahesh Dutta, Sita Ram Bhandar Society vs. Government of NCET of Delhi, Omprakash Verma vs. State of A.P. and Naharsingh vs. State of U.P. this Court laid down the following principles: (Banda Development Authority case, SCC Page 411, para 37)
Supreme Court of India Cites 38 - Cited by 100 - S B Sinha - Full Document

Omprakash Verma & Ors vs State Of A.P. & Ors on 8 October, 2010

After making reference to the judgments in Balwant Narayan Bhagde vs. M.D.Bhagwat, Balmok and Khatri Educational and Industrial Trust vs. State of Punjab, P.K.Kalburqi vs. State of Karnataka, NTPC Ltd., vs. Mahesh Dutta, Sita Ram Bhandar Society vs. Government of NCET of Delhi, Omprakash Verma vs. State of A.P. and Naharsingh vs. State of U.P. this Court laid down the following principles: (Banda Development Authority case, SCC Page 411, para 37)
Supreme Court of India Cites 47 - Cited by 348 - P Sathasivam - Full Document

Special Land Acquisition Officer, ... vs Godrej And Boyce on 27 October, 1987

11. He also relies on the Apex Court's judgment in the case of SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, BOMBAY AND OTHERS v. M/S.GODREJ AND BOYCE reported in (1988) 1 SCC 50, wherein it is held that the mere issuance of the notification under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('the L.A. Act' for short) do not divest the owner of his rights in the acquired land. All such notifications do not confer any rights on the State Government to interfere with the ownership or other rights in the land.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 67 - E S Venkataramiah - Full Document

Raghbir Singh Sehrawat vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 23 November, 2011

12. He also sought to draw support from the Apex Court judgment in the case of RAGHBIR SINGH SEHRAWAT v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS reported in (2012) 1 SCC 792 to advance the submission that when it is not the case of the respondents that the petitioners/their predecessors-in-title were given the notice that the possession of the acquired land would be taken on 30.05.1998 and that the petitioners/their 9 predecessors should remain present at the site, the mahazar has to be dismissed as a self-serving document.
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 429 - G S Singhvi - Full Document
1   2 Next