Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: banglore development authority act 1976 chapter 4 acquisition of land Page 1 of about 8,076 results (0.248 seconds)

Vasanth Sreedhar Kulkarni and Others Vs. State of Karnataka and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : (2012)1SCC138; 2012(1)SCJ722

..... estimated cost of the scheme and area is reserved for garden, playground and civic amenity sites, as per sub section (c) and (d) of section 16 of the karnataka urban development authorities act 1987. hence, requested for according administrative approval for the said scheme. government order in no.hud/446/mib, bangalore, dated 9th june 1994.after considering the proposal of the letter ..... amenity area earmarked in the scheme without the orders of the government.21. the above noted provisions are pari materia to sections 15, 16, 17 and 19 of the bangalore development authority act, 1976, which were interpreted in bondu ramaswamy's case. an argument similar to the one made before us was rejected by three-judge bench by making the following observations:the .....

Sri. p.g.belliappa Vs. The Commissioner

Court : Karnataka

..... chief justice delivered the following:3. judgment this is one of the several cases we have come across where the bangalore development authority (for short bda) constituted under the bangalore development authority act, 1976 (for short, bda act) has illegally taken over possession of a private property belonging to the respondent without acquiring the same in accordance with law ..... /o sri ganapathy aged67years r/a no.19, cunningham road bangalore-560 052. cross objector (by shri murthy d.naik, advocate) and: the commissioner bangalore development authority t.chowdaiah road kumara park west bengaluru-560 020. respondent cross objections is filed under order xli rule22of c.p.c. read with rule26of chapter vi-a ..... not get compensation under the said act of 2013 on account of illegal deprivation of the property from the year 2002 onwards. the law on this aspect has been laid down by the apex court in the case of r.l.jain (dead by l.rs.) .v. delhi development authority and others4. paragraphs 17 and .....

<td Class=btext Bgcolor=#ffffff><span Class=boldtxt>parties :</Span> H ...

Court : Karnataka

..... the case of smt.nagu bai and others v/s. state of karnataka (ilr 2001 kar. 1169) which is under the provisions of the karnataka urban development authorities act, 1987 it is held that the subsequent purchasers though are not entitled to challenge the acquisition proceedings are however, entitled to get a declaration that acquisition ..... footing from the scheme formulated which is the subject matter of execution under the provisions of the bangalore development authority act. on a conjunct reading of the provisions of sections 27 of bda act and 36 of the act. it is held that where a scheme lapses the acquisition may not and that is of course, ..... in the provisions of section 11-a of the land acquisition act into chapter iv of the bangalore development authority act. 27. it was also stated that only in regard to the matters which are not specifically dealt with in the bangalore development authority act, reference to land acquisition act, in terms of section 36, has been made, for example .....

Bangalore City Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... in the acquisition of the lands belonging to the private respondents and others. 3.1 bangalore development authority (bda) was constituted by the state government under section 3 of the bangalore development authority act, 1976, (for short, `the 1976 act'), which was enacted by the state legislature for ensuring planned development of the city of bangalore and areas adjacent thereto. in terms of section 15 of the ..... 1976 act, the bda is empowered to draw up detailed schemes for the development of the bangalore metropolitan area and with the .....

J Venkatesh Reddy Vs. The State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

..... of the land owners. this is the effect of lapsing as set out in section 24(2) of 2013 act. in respect of acquisition made under the karnataka urban development authorities act, 1987 and the bengaluru development authority act, 1976 (section 36(2)), this court in the case of chikkatayamma, has held that section 36 of the ..... urban development authorities act, 1987 and the bangalore development authorities act, 1976 are in all material particulars similar to section 30 of the kiad act. the only difference between section 30 of the kiad act and section 36 of the aforesaid acts is that while all the provisions of 1894 act are applicable in the former acts, under the kiad act, the ..... others, (2011)3 scc139 a constitution bench of the supreme court held that section 11-a of the land acquisition act, 1894 is inapplicable to the provisions of the bangalore development authority act, 1976. while holding as such, the court examined the repugnancy between the two legislations and held as such: 120. .....

J. Venkatesh Reddy and Others Vs. The State of Karnataka, Represented ...

Court : Karnataka

..... the land owners. this is the effect of "lapsing" as set out in section 24(2) of 2013 act. in respect of acquisition made under the karnataka urban development authorities act, 1987 and the bengaluru development authority act, 1976 (section 36(2)), this court in the case of chikkatayamma, has held that section 36 of the ..... urban development authorities act, 1987 and the bangalore development authorities act, 1976 are in all material particulars similar to section 30 of the kiad act. the only difference between section 30 of the kiad act and section 36 of the aforesaid acts is that while all the provisions of 1894 act are applicable in the former acts, under the kiad act, the ..... others, (2011)3 scc 139, a constitution bench of the supreme court held that section 11-a of the land acquisition act, 1894 is inapplicable to the provisions of the bangalore development authority act, 1976. while holding as such, the court examined the repugnancy between the two legislations and held as such: "120. .....

Urban Improvement Trust Bikaner Vs. Gordhan Dass(d) Through Lrs.

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... above two decisions (i.e., state of bihar v dhirendra kumar and laxmi chand v. gram panchayat), in commissioner, bangalore development authority and another v. brijesh reddy and another (supra), it was held: 18. it is clear that the land acquisition act is a complete code in itself and is meant to serve public purpose. by necessary implication, the power of the civil ..... the provisions of the 1959 act were itself not followed before issuing notification, without which the title cannot be said to be disputed. such a suit for injunction in the absence of contest to the title would therefore, be maintainable.32. in state of bihar v dhirendra kumar22, laxmi chand v gram panchayat kararia23, commissioner, bangalore development authority and another v brijesh reddy .....

Girnar Traders and Digambar Motiram Jhadhav. Vs. State of Maharashtra ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... land acquisition act is to acquire land for public purpose and for ..... clear that the primary object of this act is acquisition of land for a public purpose which may be `planned development' or even otherwise. in fact the provisions of the land acquisition act do not deal with the concept of development as is intended under the specific statutes like mrtp act, delhi development act, 1957, bangalore development authority act, 1976 (for short, `the bangalore act') etc. the primary purpose of the .....

H.G. Sheela Vs. State of Karnataka and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2006(3)KarLJ24

..... notified under section 126 as it was for a public purpose. if the earmarked, designated or reserved land in the subsequent plan prepared and approved under the bombay metropolitan region development authority act, 1974, does not subserve any public purpose within the earmarked, designated or reserved public purposes, necessarily, the public purpose envisaged under section 126 outlives its purpose and gets eclipsed. public ..... for that purpose. although it is open to the bda to alter the scheme, no alteration has been made in the manner contemplated by section 19(4) of the bangalore development authority act, 1976. xxx xxx conversion of the open space reserved for a park for the general good of the public into a site for the construction of a privately owned and .....

Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe, Minority Communities and Backward Cl ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1990KAR1456

..... recognised under the statute and the rules made thereunder and if such an allotment is made, it would be violative of the provisions of the bangalore development authority act and the rules. according to the government order dated 9-6-1980 a copy of which is annexure-a, the scheme was approved and thereafter followed ..... an undeveloped state clearly amounts to the violation of the scheme and abdication of its duty by the bangalore development authority . under the act it is the power and duty of the bangalore development authority itself to execute a development scheme with improvement if any, considered necessary, and then to invite applications for allotment of sites and ..... to be distributed by its managing committee uncontrolled by article 14 and the rules of allotment. the object and intendment of the act is that in the area in which the bangalore development authority operates, it is its duty to prepare the schemes and implement the scheme and no other agency, for formation and allotment .....