Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.34 seconds)The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Section 4 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
The Collector (Distt. Magistrate) ... vs Raja Ram Jaiswal Etc on 29 April, 1985
Therefore, the decision in Raja Ram Jaiswal's case, . I cannot have any bearing in construing the provisions of Section 4(1) as amended. Whether the notification in the official gazette proceeds the notification in the news paper or the publication of the notification in the newspaper precede the gazette notification, matters very little as long as it is the last of the dates of such publication and the giving of such public notice being referred to as the date of publication of the notification, which alone would determine the date of publication of the Notification.
M. Rajagopal And Ors. vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu And Anr. on 29 April, 1992
That being so, the aforesaid two decisions in M. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1992 (II) MLJ 404 and Muthukaruppan and Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1994 (I) MLJ 303, in our view do not lay down the law correctly. As such the same require to be overruled and the same arc overruled.
Section 10 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 30 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
State Of Haryana vs Raghubir Dayal on 10 November, 1994
9. The next contention is that the declaration made under Section 6 of the Act has not been published in the locality as required by sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Act. Nodoubt, the learned Government Pleader has not been able to place before us the records to show that the substance of the declaration made under Section 6 of the Act has been published in the locality. However, it is the contention of the learned Government Pleader that the same has been done. Even otherwise, we proceed on the basis that it has not been proved by the respondents that the substance of the declaration made under Section 6 is published in convenient places: but, the failure to do so does vitiate the acquisition proceedings, because the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Raghubir Dayal, has held that the requirement as to publication of the substance of the declaration made under Section 6 of the Act is directory, but not mandatory, the relevant portion of the judgment is as follows:-
Section 9 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 2 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
1