Search Judgments
Search by legal issue, facts, citation, statute, or case name
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 Vikas Pradhikaran v. Shyam
The Supreme Court held that acquisition under the 1894 Act does not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if possession was taken, even if compensation was unpaid, and set aside the High Court's order declaring lapse.
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. Nemchand Sharma & Ors.
The Supreme Court clarified that land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act lapse only if both possession is not taken and compensation is not paid, allowing the Delhi Development Authority's appeal and setting aside the High Court's order.
Delhi Development Authority v. Nem Chand Sharma
The Supreme Court clarified that acquisition proceedings pending as of January 1, 2014, are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act only if both possession was not taken and compensation was not paid for five years or more, and upheld the validity of acquisitions where possession and compensation were completed.
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.
Manubhai Sendhabhai Bharvad v. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited
The Supreme Court held that prolonged temporary acquisition without permanent acquisition violates constitutional property rights and directed ONGC to complete acquisition within 12 months or face consequences.
Manubhai Sendhabhai Bharwad v. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd.
The Supreme Court upheld temporary acquisition of land by ONGC but directed completion of permanent acquisition within 12 months and recognized landowners' right to fair compensation under Article 300A.
Government of NCT of Delhi v. Om Prakash
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 fully paid.
Bhoomi Evam Bhavan Vibhag, Rashtriya Rajdhani Kshetra Delhi Sarkar v. Dilli Vikas Pradhikaran
The Supreme Court held that land acquisition completed by possession and handing over before the 2013 Act's enforcement cannot be declared ineffective under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act despite non-payment of compensation.
Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences v. Dr. Yerra Trinadh & Others
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal directing re-evaluation of marks and revision of the merit list to ensure proportional and equitable allocation of marks in a recruitment examination.
Arunachal Pradesh Public Service Commission v. Hage Mamung
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 courts cannot order re-evaluation of select candidates’ papers absent statutory authority.
Delhi Development Authority v. Shakuntla Devi
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 has not been paid or tendered.