Accused Not Entitled To Copies Of 'Unrelied' Upon Documents At The Stage Of Framing Of Charges Under Section 91 CrPC: Supreme Court Elected Representatives Have No Privilege To Resort To Violence; Criminal Antecedents Are Material For Bail Adjudication: Supreme Court Mere Absence Of Transport Documents Does Not Create A Presumption Of Violation Of Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004: Supreme Court Section 396 IPC | Conviction For 'Dacoity With Murder' Requires Proof That Murder Was Committed In The Course Of Dacoity: Allahabad High Court 'Developers Cannot Delay Conveyance For Eternity And Milk Additional FSI Benefits': Bombay High Court Upholds Societies' Deemed Conveyance Pre-Approval Statutory Dues Stand Extinguished Upon Approval Of Resolution Plan; GST Authorities Cannot Initiate Fresh Proceedings: Calcutta High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell With Delivery Of Possession Is Admissible In A Suit For Specific Performance: Delhi High Court Stigmatic Order Discharging Probationer Without Inquiry Is Void For Violation Of Natural Justice: Gujarat High Court Execution Proceedings | Court Cannot Impose Arbitrary Financial Conditions Without Reason In Stay Applications: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 528 BNSS | High Court Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Circumvent Statutory Bar Against Second Revision: Delhi High Court Advocate Empanelment | Restriction On Multiple Applications Is A Procedural Choice Within Employer’s Domain: Delhi High Court Acquittal Appeal | Double Presumption Of Innocence In Favour Of Accused Cannot Be Disturbed Merely Because Another View Is Possible: Gujarat High Court SC/ST Act | Offence Under Section 3(1)(g) Not Attracted If Dispossession Or Interference Is Not Due To Victim's Caste: Himachal Pradesh High Court Judicial Officer Must Maintain Distance From Practicing Advocates To Avoid Impropriety: Gujarat High Court Upholds Dismissal Section 183 BNSS | Investigating Officer Cannot Independently Record Further Statement Of Victim After Recording Before Magistrate: Karnataka High Court Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP 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