Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court's Decision on Land Acquisition Lapse

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


New Delhi, April 11, 2023: In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has set aside the decision of the High Court regarding the lapse of land acquisition proceedings. The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar.

The appeals before the Supreme Court involved the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (HSIIDC) and others as appellants and M/s Honeywell International (India) Pvt. Ltd. as the respondent. The High Court had declared that the acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The Supreme Court divided the appeals into two categories. In the first category, where the original writ petitioners had challenged the acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and sought a declaration of lapse under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013, the High Court's decision was solely based on a previous case. The Supreme Court ruled that the High Court's decision in these cases was unsustainable, citing another judgment by the Constitution Bench.

In the second category of appeals, where only a declaration of lapse was sought, the Supreme Court also set aside the High Court's judgments. The Court further remanded both categories of appeals back to the High Court for fresh consideration of the writ petitions on their merits, excluding the issue of the applicability of Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.

The Supreme Court emphasized the need for an early disposal of the cases and requested the High Court to decide them within a period of nine months.

This judgment brings clarity to the issue of land acquisition lapse and provides guidance for the future interpretation of relevant laws. The decision will have a significant impact on land acquisition cases and related disputes throughout the country.

The referred cases in this judgment include Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal & Others Etc., (2020) 8 SCC 129, and Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, (2014) 3 SCC 183.

D.D-11.Apr.2023

Haryana State Industrial  And Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.  vs M/s Honeywell International (India) Pvt. Ltd.             

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/11-Apr-2023-Haryana-State-Industrial-Vs-Honeywell-Rep.pdf"]

Latest Legal News