Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013

The appellant, Kishore Chhabra, owned land in Sultanpur, Sonipat, which was included in a 1992 notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for development. He challenged the acquisition, arguing that his land should be released because a factory had been operating there since 1970 and that other simi…

The Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation sought to acquire land for a highway project and determined compensation using the circle rate fixed under the Indian Stamp Act, as prescribed by the Collector’s Guidelines. The landowners challenged the award, arguing that the compensation was excessive and that the "the…

The appellants purchased a 50,138 sq.ft. plot in Amravati that had been reserved for a private school under the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1967. The original owners served a purchase notice under Section 49 in 2006, which was confirmed in 2007, but the authorities failed to acquire the land within the on…

The dispute concerned ownership of a 2‑18‑10 bigha parcel of land in NOIDA, jointly purchased in 1997 by Reddy, Sudhakar and Vishnu. Reddy later sought to establish sole ownership by filing separate suits and a writ petition, suppressing the earlier joint‑ownership litigation, and obtained a High Court order declaring …

The appellant, Sumitraben Gamit, owned land in Tapi district of Gujarat, part of which was used for a canal without any acquisition proceeding or compensation. The Gujarat High Court held that the market value of the land should be fixed as of 1 January 2014, the date of commencement of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, rather t…

The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from the acquisition of 56.14 bighas of land for a safety zone around a cement plant, where the original award of compensation was paid by Jaiprakash Associates Ltd (JAL) and a supplementary award was later issued. The key issue was whether the liability for the supplementar…

The case concerned compensation disputes arising from the erection of transmission towers and power lines under a 400 kV project that traversed four districts in Haryana. Landowners claimed that the compensation awarded by the District Judges and upheld by the High Court was inadequate, while the contractor sought to l…

The State of Haryana appealed against several Punjab and Haryana High Court orders that had set aside land acquisition notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, following writ petitions by land owners and subsequent purchasers. The petitioners sought relief under Section 24(2) of th…

The Government of NCT of Delhi and the Delhi Development Authority filed a batch of review petitions challenging Supreme Court judgments that had dismissed civil appeals and special leave petitions which held land‑acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act to be deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, relyin…

The Supreme Court examined a massive batch of land‑acquisition disputes involving the Government of NCT of Delhi and its agencies versus private landowners, notably M/s BSK Realtors LLP. The core issues were whether the dismissal of a civil appeal by one authority in the first round barred other authorities from filing…

The Delhi Development Authority and other government bodies filed a batch of appeals and petitions seeking condonation of delay for challenging High Court orders that declared land acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. The appellants argued that subsequent judici…

The Kolkata Municipal Corporation claimed it had acquired the land of Bimal Kumar Shah under Section 352 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, which it argued gave it power to acquire land for streets and parks. The High Court held that Section 352 does not confer a power of compulsory acquisition and set asi…

The New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) sought to acquire 83.761 hectares of land for industrial development, issuing a Section 4 notification in 2013. Several landowners filed objections under Section 5A, claiming their lands were "abadi" and should be exempt, but the Collector dismissed the objections …

The Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad (the Board) sought to acquire land covered by Khasra No. 673 for a housing scheme, but the High Court quashed the acquisition on the ground that the respondents were not given a pre‑acquisition notice under Section 29 of the 1965 Act, denying them the right to object. The Supr…

The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) filed a miscellaneous application seeking clarification on whether the Supreme Court's 2019 judgment in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh, which mandated payment of solatium and interest to landowners whose land was acquired under the NHAI Act, should operate only prospectiv…

Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. (MCL) sought extensions and directions from the Supreme Court to finalize compensation and rehabilitation benefits for land oustees of four villages (Tumulia, Jhupuranga, Ratansara, Kirpsira) acquired for coal mining. The Court had earlier, in its 03.11.2022 judgment, fixed the Gopalpur model f…

The appellants purchased residential plots in Bengaluru between 1995 and 1997, which were later acquired by the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB) under a preliminary notification dated 29 January 2003. Although possession was taken in 2005, no compensation award was made until a Special Land Acquisit…