Back
A. P. THAKER
Kantilal Jinabhai Patel Deceased Through Legal Heirs – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India against the order of the appellate authority passed under Section 33 of the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976 confirming the order of the competent authority dated 28.2.1984. By the said order, the competent authority has found that the petitioner was holding 14006 sq.mtrs. of excess land.
2. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are as under :-
2.1 On coming into operation of the Urban Lands (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, the petitioner filed Form No.6 of the said Act in the office of respondent no.2 on 19.8.1976, wherein it mentioned 12 properties held by the petitioner. In column no.14, the petitioner has stated that, in the said property, his four sons have share along with him. On scrutiny of the form, respondent no.2 issued draft statement and notice under Section 8 of the said Act requiring the petitioner to file objection to the said draft statement. Accordingly, the petitioner filed objection on 5.11.1982 contending that he is not holding excess land and property at Survey no.3 paiki, 18 paiki, 482, 499, 418 and 291 are agricultural lands mainly used for agricul
It is incumbent upon the competent authority to be in actual possession of the property for substantiating its stand that the provisions of repeal Act would not be applicable.
The court held that statutory compliance under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act is mandatory for valid dispossession, emphasizing that mere vesting does not equate to possession.
Possession of land under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act must be established lawfully; mere vesting does not equate to possession, especially post-repeal.
plain language of sub-section (5) of Section 10 means and envisages a notice in writing in the form of an order to surrender or make over the possession to the State. Sub-Section (5) notice is not in....
Failure to issue notice under Section 10(5) of the ULC Act to possessors renders dispossession unlawful and results in the abatement of proceedings under Section 4 of the Repealing Act.
The court ruled that actual physical possession must be established for the State to validly claim ownership under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, and procedural requirements for n....
Proceedings issued under the Urban Land Ceiling Act against a deceased declarant are null and void; possession must be established prior to claiming surplus land.
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
