Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2009(3)BomCR663; 2009(111)BomLR2093; 2009(4)MhLj693
V.C. Daga, J.1. The petitioner, in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is seeking following declaration;That it be declared that all proceedings/notifications and notices issued under Section 9 and 10 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 in respect of the land situated at bearing survey No. 34/6 Koliwali, Taluka Kalyan District Thane admeasuring 2008.00 sq.mtrs. stand abated in view of Section 4 of the Urban Land Ceiling (Repeal) Act, 1999 and the respondents are now not entitled to resort to the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act 1976 in respect of the petitioners land;FACTUAL BACKDROPS:In order to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner, few relevant introductory facts needs to be noticed at the outset.2. Petitioner herein is a holder of land admeasuring 16490 sq.mtrs. under Plot bearing No. 33, 34(6) and 35/15 at village Koliwali, Taluka Kalyan, District Thane.3. On 3rd October, 1983, the Deputy Collector & Co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2004KAR4518; 2004(7)KarLJ513
ORDERN.S. Veerabhadraiah, J.1. The petitioner sought for quashing of Annexure-D dated 27.11.2001 communicated to the petitioner in pursuance of the letter addressed to the Deputy Commissioner, Dharwad, by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Karnataka, Department of Urban Development, dated 12.9.2001.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The petitioner Sri Kuratti Veerappa, being the owner of the land RS No. 9B/2A of Sutagatti Village, Hubli Taluk, measuring about 5 acres equivalent to 20, 234.8286 Sq. Mts. submitted a declaration as required under Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 showing excess land as 18, 734.2286 excluding the area of 1, 500 Sq. Mts. The Deputy Commissioner also issued notification declaring that 18, 734.2286 is the excess of land as required under Section 10(3) of the Act. At this stage, the petitioner filed WP No. 2146/91 which came to be remanded to the Deputy Commissioner for fresh disposal in accordance with law. At...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Reported in : (2000)2GLR235
M.R. Calla, J. 1. All these 30 Civil Applications filed in respective Letters Patent Appeals have been moved on behalf of State of Gujarat, Revenue Department and the Competent Authority and Deputy Collector (ULC) seeking condonation of delay in concerned Letters Patent Appeals. Whereas common questions based on identical facts are involved, we propose to decide this group of 30 Civil Applications by this common judgment and order as under:-2. Since Civil Application No.7393/2000 in Letters Patent Appeal St.No.96/2000 arising out of Special Civil Application No.539/93 and the common order dated 10.9.99 passed in Misc. Civil Application No.1503/99 in Special Civil Application No.539/93 have been argued as the main and leading case, we may give preference to the facts of this particular case for the purpose of passing this order as was agreed by the parties. Special Civil Application No.539/93 filed by one Sankalchand P. Vachheta and pursued by his legal representatives on his expiry, wa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order communicated in S.R.No.249/96C dated 4.3.2002 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same.) 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. It has been stated that the petitioner is the owner of 95 cents of land, in survey No.172/1 and 3 of Zamin Pallavaram village. It had been bequeathed in favour of the petitioner by way of a Will, dated 13.12.1973, executed by his father, Raji Naicker, bearing document No.27 of 1973. Accordingly, the petitioner had got 78 cents of land. By another Will, dated 9.6.1976, bearing document No.14 of 1976, 17 cents of land had been bequeathed to the petitioner, by his mother, Rajammal. As such, the petitioner, was in possession of a total extent of 95 cents of land, along with his wif...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Declaration to declare that the proceedings initiated by the second respondent under the provision of the Principal Act, Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 in the vacant house site land comprised in Survey No.211/7A, Part of Sea Ward 2nd Land, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai-600 041, measuring to an extent of 3.158 grounds i.e, 7579.429 sq.ft or thereabout out of 3.52 grounds at Thiruvanmiyur Village, Mylapore, Triplicane Taluk, Chennai District is abated in view of Section 4 of Repeal Act, 20/99, since the physical possession of the vacant house site land comprised in Survey No.211/7A Part of Sea Ward 2nd Lane, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai-600 041, measuring to an extent of 3.158 grounds i.e., 7579.429 sq.ft. or thereabout out of 3.52 grounds at Thiruvanmiyur Village, Mylapore Triplicane Taluk, Chennai District is with the petitioner.) 1. The petitioner has submitted that on 25.11.2011, he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
J U D G M E N T1. The Hon ble the Chief JusticeSince, in all these writ appeals, which are 27 in number, a common question of interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 and the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act 20 of 1999 has to be answered, they have been heard together and answered by this common judgment. All these appeals arose out of separate judgements delivered by learned single Judges in various writ petitions filed by aggrieved land owners. Almost all the writ petitions have been allowed mainly on the ground that physical possession of the lands continued with the land owners or the persons claiming through them. The factual details of each case have been discussed in the latter part of this judgment.2. The State, which is the appellant in all but three appeals, has assailed the impugned judgments rendered by the writ courts as being illegal and wholly without jurisdiction. Mr. S. Gomathinay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2009)5MLJ357
ORDERM. Jaichandren, J.1. Inasmuch as the issue involved in both the writ petitions are one and the same, a common order is being passed.2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.3. It has been stated that late N.S. Ramaswami, brother of the petitioner, was the owner of the vacant land in Thiruvanmiyur Revenue Village, Chennai, in S. No. 214/2, measuring 5 grounds and 498 Sq.Ft. The Government of Tamilnadu had acquired 2 grounds and 2298 Sq.Ft., 650 Sq.Mts. or 7080 Sq.Ft., under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978. As he was a bachelor, he was allowed to retain 2 grounds and 600 sq.ft. He had died, on 21.2.87, and thereafter, the petitioner had succeeded to his estate, as his sole legal heir.4. It has been stated that the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978, had been repealed by the State Government by the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (2006)3MLJ509
ORDERM. Jaichandren, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ of declaration that all the proceedings initiated under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 in respect of the land owned by the petitioner situated at Survey No. 167/1I (Old Survey No. 167/1) in Karapakkam Village, Saidapet Taluk, admeasuring about 24050 sq. metres are illegal and non-est and that in any event have abated consequent upon the repeal of the Principal Act by the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repealing Act, 1999 and consequently direct that the petitioner is entitled to deal with the above mentioned lands owned and possessed by him as a full and absolute owner.2. The brief facts for filing of the present writ petition are as follows:The lands which form the subject matter of the present proceedings are Punja lands comprised in Survey No. 167/1I, Karapakkam Village, Saidapet Taluk. The said lands had been purchased by the petitioner from one Perum...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2153 OF2012 State of M.P. ...Appellant versus Ghisilal ...Respondent JUDGMENT R.SUBHASH REDDY,J.1. This Civil Appeal is preferred by the appellant - State of Madhya Pradesh, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 08.11.2006 passed in Second Appeal No.129 of 2006. By the aforesaid order, the High Court has dismissed the Second Appeal, preferred by the appellant herein confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned IV Additional District Judge, Bhopal, in Civil Appeal No.37-A/2005 dated 23.07.2005 and the judgment and decree dated 24.12.2004 passed by the learned XIIth Civil Judge, Class - II, Bhopal, in Civil Suit No.138-A/2004.2. Necessary facts, in brief, are as under:3. The agricultural land bearing Survey Nos.171 to 184, 214, 217 and 284 admeasuring 17.18 acres situated at Village Bag Sevania, Tehsil Huzur, District Bhopal, was recorded in the name of Late Padam Singh as a Bhoomi Swami...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Nagpur
P.C. By this Writ Petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks a declaration that all proceedings under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 stand abated in view of Section 3 and 4 of the Urban land Ceiling Repeal Act 1999. Accordingly respondents be directed to make appropriate change in the revenue record and restore the name of the petitioner therein in respect of land Kh.Nos.211 and 211/1 mouza Wadi Patwari Halka 47 Tahsil Nagpur Gramin, District Nagpur. 2. Petitioner states that this land admeasures about 3.84 H.R. It was shown in the land records in the name of the petitioner. When the returns were filed in the year 1981 it appears that an enquiry was made and a portion admeasuring 22781 Sq. Mtrs. from these khasra numbers came to be notified and declared as surplus vacant land. That order was passed on 28th December 1981. Accordingly, the petitioner presented a scheme under Section 20(1) of the Urban Land Ceiling Act. It is stated th...
Tag this Judgment!