Supreme Court of India
18,256 judgments
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Ratiram
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken, even if compensation has not been paid, overruling Pune Municipal Corporation (2014).
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Ratiram
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken even though compensation was not paid, overruling earlier contrary precedent.
Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd v. State of Odisha
The Supreme Court upheld the State Government's entitlement to compensation and premium for lands vested in a Government company under the Coal Bearing Areas Act, distinguishing such payments from royalty payable for mineral extraction.
Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd v. State of Odisha
The Supreme Court upheld the State Government's entitlement to compensation and premium for lands vested in a Government company under the Coal Bearing Areas Act, distinguishing such compensation from royalty payable under Section 18(a).
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Manjeet Singh Anand
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings completed with possession and compensation prior to 2014 do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, and only recorded owners have locus to challenge acquisition lapse.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Manjeet Singh Anand
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings from 1964 did not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as possession was taken and compensation deposited, and a non-owner cannot challenge such acquisition.
The ESI Corporation v. M/s. Radhika Theatre
The Supreme Court held that the amendment to Section 1 of the ESI Act effective from 20.10.1989 applies prospectively to all establishments irrespective of employee count, restoring demand notices for contributions post that date.
The ESI Corporation v. M/s. Radhika Theatre
The Supreme Court held that the amendment to the ESI Act inserting Sub-section (6) of Section 1 applies prospectively from 20.10.1989, making all establishments liable for ESI contributions regardless of employee count, and restored demand notices issued post that date.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. v. Om Prakash (Dead) Through LRs. & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken, even if full compensation was not tendered, and set aside the High Court's declaration of lapse.
The Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission & Another v. Miss Hage Mamung & Others
The Supreme Court held that a Public Service Commission's decision to cancel questions with wrong answer keys and award pro-rata marks to all candidates is lawful and quashed the High Court's order directing re-evaluation of only two candidates' answer sheets.
Delhi Development Authority v. Shyamo & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession is taken or compensation tendered, and a petitioner must establish ownership before challenging acquisition.
Delhi Development Authority v. Shyamo & Ors.
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken, even if compensation was not paid to a claimant who was not the recorded owner, and dismissed the writ petition challenging acquisition on that ground.
Delhi Development Authority v. Asha Prakash
The Supreme Court held that a subsequent purchaser has no locus to challenge land acquisition lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act and clarified that acquisition lapses only if both possession and compensation are lacking, overruling prior conflicting precedents.
Delhi Development Authority v. Rajesh Dua
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if either possession has been taken or compensation paid, overruling earlier contrary decisions.
Delhi Development Authority v. Rambir
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was taken and compensation tendered before the Act's commencement, overruling earlier contrary precedent.
Delhi Development Authority v. Rambir
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was taken prior to its commencement, even if compensation was not tendered or deposited.
Delhi Development Authority v. Bhagi Singh
The Supreme Court held that valid possession taken before the 2013 Act prevents lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2), allowing the Delhi Development Authority's appeal against the High Court's declaration of lapse.
Delhi Development Authority v. Bhagi Singh
The Supreme Court held that possession taken prior to the 2013 Act precludes lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2), setting aside the High Court's contrary decision.
Delhi Development Authority v. Nem Chand Sharma
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition proceedings do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession has been taken or compensation tendered, overruling earlier contrary precedents and allowing the Delhi Development Authority's appeal.
Manubhai Sendhabhai Bharwad v. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.
The Supreme Court upheld the continuation of temporary acquisition but directed ONGC to complete permanent acquisition within a year, emphasizing that prolonged temporary acquisition violates landowners' constitutional rights.