IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
RAJESH BINDAL, J.
MADAN PAL – Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent
R.F.A. No. 2373 of 2010 (O&M)
Decided On : 06-10-2015
Rajesh Bindal, J.
This order will dispose of.
R.F.A. Nos. 2373 to 2380, 2478, 2853, 2978, 3044 to 3048, 3127 to 3146, 3148 to 3164, 3170 to 3186, 3191, 3223, 3383 to 3401, 3503 to 3525, 3540, 3541, 3790 to 3798, 3840 to 3842, 3930 to 3946, 3959 to 3975, 4043 to 4062, 4148, 4149, 4153, 4157, 4158, 4162 to 4169, 4171, 4172, 4174 to 4177, 4179 to 4192, 4195, 4213 to 4215, 4217 to 4220, 4235, 4236, 4241, 4278, 4281, 4312 to 4320, 4322 to 4368, 4514, 4527, 4528, 4585 to 4587, 4597 to 4601, 4624, 4625, 4646, 4674, 4739, 4740, 4837, 4838, 4856 to 4861, 4871 to 4876, 4949, 4984, 5016 to 5022, 5275, 5359, 5360, 5382, 5383, 5482 of 2010;
Cross Objections Nos. 173-CI, 182-CI, 184-CI to 189-CI, 193-CI, 198-CI, 216-CI and 217-CI of 2010;
RFA Nos. 150, 622 to 626, 673, 683, 1195 to 1199, 1714, 1915, 2234, 2247 to 2249, 2407 to 2453, 2864 to 2871, 3009, 3061 to 3078, 3102 to 3109, 3181 to 3231, 3358 to 3361, 3364, 3365, 3373 to 3376, 3429, 3443, 3444, 3708, 3769 to 3774, 4113 to 4115, 4118, 4119, 4136, 4139, 4154, 4199 to 4202, 4205, 4206, 4307, 4310, 4319, 4322, 4326 to 4328, 4333, 4334, 4342, 4343, 4353, 4354, 4357, 4455, 4464, 4468, 4477, 4491, 4492, 4513, 4586 to 4608, 4712 to 4720, 4817, 4818, 4830 to 4832, 4841, 4842, 5230, 5231, 5343 to 5346, 5385, 5386, 5390, 5431, 5941 to 5957, 6124, 6132, 6139, 6146, 6154, 6242 to 6305 to 6357, 6482, 6494 to 6508, 6525 to 6527, 6735 to 6738, 6797, 6798, 6804, 6805, 6887, 6888, 6943, 6949, 6957, 7122, 7125, 7133, 7139, 7259, 7260, 7336 to 7341, 7370, 7645, 7654, 7665, 7689, 7825 to 7829, 7868, 7878, 7882, 7897, 7993 of 2011;
Cross Objections Nos. 14-CI, 15-CI, 80-CI of 2011;
RFA Nos. 256, 268, 270, 271, 522, 523, 552, 553, 1087, 1088, 1189, 1562, 1573, 1597, 1968, 2677, 2678, 3072, 3088, 4687 to 4689, 4736, 5582, 5762,6532, 6546, 6942, 6943, 7149 to 7151, 7185, 7225, 7242, 7260 to 7262 of 2012;
Cross Objections Nos. 4-CI, 11-CI of 2012;
RFA Nos. 384, 385, 399, 400, 462, 465, 958, 959, 1022, 1023, 1056, 1088, 1094, 1102, 1355 to 1363, 1656, 1969 to 1972, 2075 to 2080, 2086 to 2091, 2126 to 2128, 2138, 2142, 2143, 2146, 2147, 2360, 2488, 2507 to 2515, 2539 to 2542, 2616, 2638, 2726 to 2730, 2822, 2826, 2872, 2874, 3378, 3381 to 3443, 3469 to 3490, 3766, 3801, 3802, 3828 to 3839, 3899 to 3901, 4012, 4013, 4018, 4019, 4034, 4105, 4106, 4224 to 4226, 4304, 4319, 4334, 4338, 4356, 4398, 4424 to 4426, 4434, 4440, 4446, 4472, 4474, 4476, 4487, 4549 to 4600, 4602 to 4607, 4751, 5414, 5418, 5420, 5898, 5901, 6211, 6369, 6424, 6549, 6853, 6865, 6875, 6880, 7110 to 7116, 7119, 7135, 7225, 7275, 7294 to 7296, 7317, 7326, 7333, 7337, 7661 to 7673, 7692 to 7696, 7913 to 7916, 8048 of 2013;
Cross Objections Nos. 69-CI, 71-CI to 75-CI of 2013;
RFA Nos. 42, 55, 74, 75, 80, 86, 89, 92, 134 to 139, 143, 144, 149, 151, 157, 161 to 163, 168, 169, 171, 172, 178, 192, 193, 245, 246, 515 to 518, 527 to 530, 582, 594, 678, 679, 769 to 771, 776, 777, 1013, 1014, 1038, 1039, 1242, 1243, 1261, 1272, 1273, 1495, 1508, 1513, 1514, 1576, 1799 to 1806, 1817 to 1819, 2067 to 2079, 2090, 2091, 2154, 2155, 2199, 2204 to 2207, 2230 to 2234, 2253 to 2255, 2266, 2276, 2277, 2304, 2310, 2314, 2422 to 2425, 2442 to 2444, 2530, 2542, 2543, 2898 to 2902, 2906, 2908, 3371, 3382, 3388, 3425 to 3427, 3651, 3669, 3731, 3734, 3942, 3943, 4004 to 4056, 4077 to 4079, 4400, 4631 to 4635, 4643, 4664, 4963 to 4967, 4973, 5102 to 5210, 5274, 5321 to 5323, 5431, 6619, 7224, 7225, 7276 to 7279, 7357, 7382, 8160, 8186, 8993, 9171, 9373, 9737, 9741, 9746, 9805, 10319, 10385 of 2014;
Cross Objections Nos.5-CI, 6-CI, 18-CI, 39-CI, 54-CI to 67-CI, 69-CI, 90-CI, 95-CI, 102-CI of 2014;
RFA Nos. 279, 316, 442, 2230, 2695, 3499, 3743 of 2015;
Cross Objections Nos. 21-CI, 26-CI, 28-CI, 36-CI, 40-CI, 65-CI of 2015.
In the appeals and cross-objections filed by the land owners, they are seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land, whereas in the
Himalayan Tiles and Marble (P) Ltd. v. Francis Victor Coutinho (Dead) by LRs
Hindu Kanya Maha Vidyalaya, Jind v. Municipal Committee, Jind
Royal Orchid Hotels Limited and another v. G. Jayarama Reddy and others
Sayeedur Rehman v. State of Bihar
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner
Darshan Lal Nagpal (Dead) by LRs v. Government of NCT of Delhi and others
Lal Chand v. Union of India and another
Union of India v. Raj Kumar Baghal Singh (Dead)
Chimanlal Hargovinddas v. Land Acquisition Officer
Viluben Jhalejar Contractor v. State of Gujarat
Basavva v. Land Acquisition Officer
Bhagwathula Samanna v. Tahsildar & Land Acquisition Officer
Land Acquisition Officer v. L. Kamalamma
Administrator General of W.B. v. Collector
K.S. Shivadevamma v. Commr. and Land Acquisition Officer
Hasanali Khanbhai & Sons v. State of Gujarat
Land Acquisition Officer v. Nookala Rajamallu
Tejumal Bhojwani v. State of U.P.
H.P. Housing Board v. Bharat S. Negi
Kiran Tandon v. Allahabad Development Authority
Himmat Singh and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh and another
Shaji Kuriakose v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd.
Atma Singh v. State of Haryana
Kamta Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar
Prithvi Raj Taneja v. State of M.P.
Periyar Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd. v. State of Kerala
Collector v. Dr. Harisingh Thakur
Raghubans Narain Singh v. U.P. Govt.
Kausalya Devi Bogra v. Land Acquisition Officer
Suresh Kumar v. Town Improvement Trust
The Dollar Company v. Collector of Madras
Major General Kapil Mehra and others v. Union of India and another
Raj Kumar and others v. Haryana State and others
Karnataka Housing Board v. Land Acquisition Officer, Gadag and others
Ambya Kalya Mhatre (Dead) through LRs and others v. State of Maharashtra
gpt-4
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.