Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (1.59 seconds)

Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag & ... vs Mst. Katiji & Ors on 19 February, 1987

"3. No doubt, some leeway is given for the Government inefficiencies but the sad part is that the authorities keep on relying on judicial pronouncements for a period of time when technology had not advanced and a greater leeway was given to the Government (Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 2 SCC 107).
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 5846 - M P Thakkar - Full Document

Union Of India And Others vs Manager M/S Jain And Associates on 6 February, 2001

9. This Hon'ble Court in Union of India vs. Manager, Jain and Associates, 2001 (3) SCC 277 decided on 06.02.2011 has held that delay ought to be condoned when sufficiently explained particularly where party seeking condonation is the Government. It is further submitted that the Hon'ble High Court ought to have condoned the delay in considering the public revenue involved and also because of the genuine difficulties and circumstances beyond the control of the petitioner, on account of which Special Leave Petition could not be filed within the time."
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 84 - Full Document

Imrat Lal And Others vs Land Acquisition Collector And Others on 5 September, 2011

29. The other decision relied upon in this regard is the case of Imrat Lal & Ors. vs. Land Acquisition Collector & Ors.10. In this case also the matter was regarding determination of compensation for the acquired land and there was a delay of 1110 days in filing the appeal for enhancement of compensation. Despite findings that no sufficient cause was shown in the application for condoning the delay, this Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal as a large number of similarly situate persons have been granted relief by this Court.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 1242 - R K Garg - Full Document
1   2 Next