Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 31 (1.08 seconds)Legal Heirs Of Prabhatbhai Shivabhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 8 February, 2021
"7. In the instant case, it appears that the Form No.1
filled up by the deceased Prabhatbhai Shivabhai
Solanki was finalized by the competent authority vide
the order dated 29.10.1986 as per AnnexureB. The
said order remained unchallenged at the instance of
the said Prabhatbhai Shivabhai Solanki. It further
appears that earlier the said Prabhatbhai was
granted exemption under Section 20(1) of the said
Act in respect of the land bearing Survey No.692,
however, the said exemption was withdrawn by the
competent authority on 26.9.1986. Thereafter, the
said Prabhatbhai Shivabhai Solanki had made an
application seeking exemption under Section 21 of
the ULC Act for putting up constructions of dwelling
units for weaker section of the society on 24.11.1986.
The said application came to be dismissed by the
competent authority vide the order dated 20/6/1988.
The said order was confirmed by the Tribunal in the
appeal preferred by the said Prabhatbhai, however, the
said order of the Tribunal having been challenged by
Page 5 of 46
Downloaded on : Thu Jan 13 10:19:44 IST 2022
C/LPA/1281/2016 JUDGMENT DT. 23.3.21
PRABHATBHAI SHIVABHAI SOLANKI THROUGH LRs v. STATE OF GUJARAT & 4 others
In Re: ULC Act : Vesting u/s. 10(3) Final : Exemption Applications don't survive.
Section 54 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
The Indian Contract Act, 1872
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 53A in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
State Of Assam & Ors vs Bhaskar Jyoti Sarma & Ors on 27 November, 2014
Section 10(5) of the said Act at any point of time. The
present petition has been filed after the repeal of the
ULC Act in the year 1999, disputing that the
possession was not taken over by the State
Government. Under the circumstances, a very
pertinent observations made by the Supreme Court in
the latest decision in case of State of Assam Vs.
Bhaskar Jyoti Sarma & Ors. (supra) are required to be
reproduced, which read as under:
"13. The case of the appellant is that
actual physical possession of the land was
taken over on 7th December, 1991 no
matter unilaterally and without notice to
the erstwhile land owner. That assertion is
stoutly denied by the respondents giving
rise to seriously disputed question of fact
which may not be amenable to a
satisfactory determination by the High
Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.
Rambaran Prosad vs Ram Mohit Hazra & Ors on 6 September, 1966
A contract of sale does not of itself create
any interest in,or charge on, the property.
This is expressly declared in Section 54 of
the Transfer of Property Act. (See
Rambaran Prosad v. Ram Mohit Hazra
[1967]1 SCR 293). The fiduciary character
of the personal obligation created by a
contract for sale is recognised in Section 3
of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and in
Section 91 of the Trusts Act. The personal
obligation created by a contract of sale is
described in Section 40 of the Transfer of
Property Act as an obligation arising out of
contract and annexed to the ownership of
property, but not amounting to an interest
or easement therein." In India, the word
`transfer' is defined with reference to the
word `convey'. The word `conveys' in
section 5 of Transfer of Property Act is used
in the wider sense of conveying
ownership... ...that only on execution of
conveyance ownership passes from one
party to another....".
Rambhau Namdeo Gajre vs Narayan Bapuji Dhotra (Dead) Through ... on 25 August, 2004
In Rambhau Namdeo Gajre v. Narayan Bapuji
Dhotra [2004 (8) SCC 614] this Court held:
State Of Rajasthan & Ors vs Basant Nahata on 7 September, 2005
In State of Rajasthan vs. Basant Nahata 2005
(12) SCC 77, this Court held :