Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.30 seconds)

State Of Up vs Adarsh Seva Sahkari Samiti Ltd on 27 January, 2015

19. The learned High Court Government Pleader while opposing this writ petition, would rely upon the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh and others vs. Adarsh Seva Sahkari Samiti Limited reported in ((2016) 12 Supreme Court Cases 493). In the said matter, the lands which were the subject-matter in the appeals, had been purchased by the respondent therein - Adarsh Seva Sahkari Samiti Limited from the original declarants / landowners during the years 1991-92. After the order under Section 8(4) of the ULC Act was passed and notification was issued under Section 10(3) of the ULC Act, the same was followed by issuance of notice under Section 10(5) of the Act to the declarant calling upon him to deliver possession of the land declared as surplus. The Apex Court, having regard to the undisputed fact that the respondent had purchased the property from the declarant which was vested with the State Government under Section 10(5) of the ULC Act in terms of Section 10(3) notification under the said Act, held that the transfer of the said property in favour of the respondent, who was claiming its interest in the said property
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 21 - Full Document

State Of U.P vs Hari Ram on 11 March, 2013

matter of State of U.P. vs. Hari Ram reported in ((2013) 4 SCC 280), wherein the meaning and context of Sub-sections (3) to (6) of Section 10 of the ULC Act was examined by the Apex Court and the manner in which possession was required to be taken when the same was not surrendered by the land owner and also the procedure, which was required to be followed while taking forcible possession of the land was also discussed by the Apex Court. The Hon`ble Apex Court in para No.12 of the said judgment has held as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 317 - K Radhakrishnan - Full Document
1