Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.19 seconds)Section 6 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Delhi Development Authority vs Shyam Sundar Khanna And Ors. on 18 September, 2003
"In view of the aforesaid pronouncements, including the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Development Authority v. Shyam Sunder Khanna (supra), the principle which can be deduced is that even in the case of void order, the aggrieved party has to approach before such an order is enforced. Till the order is enforced (in the instant case to mean that till possession is taken) the aggrieved party may challenge the order and at that stage the question of delay, laches or waiver would not come in his way. However, after the order is enforced, namely, possession is taken and the writ petition is filed thereafter, considerations like delay, laches or waiver would become relevant even when contention raised is that the impugned order was void."
Ram Kishan vs Union Of India & Ors on 1 September, 1995
17. Consequence would be obvious. As issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Act is sine qua non of the acquisition proceedings, in the absence of such a Notification all further proceedings would be null and void and of effect. It is so held repeatedly that in the absence of notification under Section 4 of the Act
subsequent acquisition proceedings initiated under Sections 6 and 11 of the Act are illegal and cannot be sustained [see Ram Kishan v. Union of India and Ors., ].
Article 300A in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 11 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Angira Devi Gupta vs The Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi on 15 April, 1985
Following passage from the judgment in the case of Smt. Angira Devi Gupta and Ors. v. Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi and Ors., succinctly brings out the legal position;
State Of Rajasthan & Ors vs D.R. Laxmi & Ors on 12 September, 1996
21. We are conscious of the fact that even in respect of acquisition proceedings on the basis of void orders, it has been held by the Supreme Court that there can be no challenge to the acquisition proceedings after possession of land is taken and the land is vested in the State [Refer. State of Rajasthan and Ors. v. D.K. Laxmi and Ors., and Delhi Development Authority v. Shyam Sunder Khanna and Ors., ].