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

2020 Supreme(SC) 670

INDIRA BANERJEE, S. RAVINDRA BHAT
B. K. RAVICHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :V. Balachandran, Siddharth Naidu, M/s. KSN & Co., Advocates
For the Respondent:Arvind Kumar Sharma, Anil Katiyar, V. N. Raghupathy, Advocates

JUDGMENT

S. Ravindra Bhat, J.

This appeal by special leave questions a judgment of the Karnataka High Court1[Dated 11.01.2008 in W.P. 8340/2006]. The High Court rejected the appellants' claim to direct the respondent (hereafter called "the Union") to vacate their lands, leaving it open to the latter to initiate appropriate proceedings for acquisition of certain lands (which belonged to the appellants).

2. Parliament, in exercise of the powers conferred upon the Union, enacted the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable properties Act, 1952 (hereafter called "the Requisitioning Act"). It was brought into force on 15.03.1952. 2[By virtue of Section 1(3), the Act was initially temporary, and to remain in force for six years. The object of the Act was to enable the Union to requisition or acquire immovable property if the competent authority was of the opinion that any property was necessary for a public purpose. By Section 1(3), the Requisitioning Act was to be in force for six years. Section 3 clothed the Union with the power to requisition properties for any public purpose; Sec


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