SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 1254

K.RAMASWAMY, S.B.MAJMUDAR
State Of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Jaipal Singh – Respondent


ORDER

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

2. Notification under Section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) was published on January 23, 1990 acquiring a large extent of the land for urbanisation and commercial purpose in Sectors No. 4A and 6 of Daruhera and Malpura Village in District Rewari. The respondents challenged the validity of the notification in the High Court on two grounds. Firstly, that there was a policy of the Government to exclude from acquisition the lands on which buildings have been constructed and secondly, the respondents had constructed shops before notification under Section 4(1) was published and, therefore, their land is liable to be excluded from the notification. The High Court in the impugned order made in Writ Petition No. 6804/91 on February 11, 1992 recorded a finding that the respondents had constructed the shops prior to the issue of the notification. There was general policy to exclude from acquisition the built-in areas. Therefore, it was held that they are liable to be excluded. The notification was quashed.

3. We have repeatedly held in several judgments that there is no general policy as s






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top