Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S. Sonak, Jitendra Jain, JJ
Vasanthi Hegde – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Per M. S. Sonak, J .)
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Learned Counsel for the parties agree that a common judgment and order can dispose of these Petitions. They submit that Writ Petition No. 8011 of 2017 may be treated as the lead Petition.
4. In Writ Petition No. 8011 of 2017, the Petitioner had applied for the following reliefs: -
A) For a writ to call for the records.
B) For a writ to quash the declaration dated 12 June 2012 concerning the subject property;
C) For a writ to quash the consent award dated 07 April 2015 regarding the subject property.
CC) For a declaration that the acquisition proceedings for the subject property have lapsed.
D) For a writ to set aside an order/letter dated 28 August 2015 (Exhibit -L) refusing to act on Petitioner’s objection dated 18 June 2015 regarding the consent award dated 07 April 2015.
5. The Petitioner claims an interest in the property bearing No. 352, Hissa No. 2, measuring 1004 sq. mtr in village Vahal, Tal. Panvel, Dist. Raigad (“the subject property”). This interest is asserted based on a convey
Subsequent purchasers of land cannot challenge acquisition proceedings if the purchase occurred after the Notification under Section 4, as such sales are void against the State.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that land acquisition proceedings can lapse if no award is made within the prescribed time under Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, and that ....
Section 11A of Act, Collector has to make an award under Section 11 within a period of two years from date of publication of declaration and if no award is made within that period, entire proceedings....
No award under Section 11 of 1894 Act for specific land post Section 6 declaration causes lapse under Section 11A; mandates fresh acquisition under 2013 Act; delay/laches inapplicable, protects Artic....
A subsequent purchaser can challenge land acquisition proceedings if they demonstrate a legal grievance, particularly where compensation has not been paid and possession has not been taken under the ....
A subsequent purchaser has no right to challenge the original acquisition or claim any benefits under the Land Acquisition Act 1894. The sale transaction after the issuance of the Section 4(1) notifi....
Subsequent purchasers post-notification under the Land Acquisition Act cannot challenge acquisition proceedings, as such sales are deemed void and they may only seek compensation.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
