TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, after quashing a declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, a fresh declaration could be directed or issued beyond the three-year period prescribed by the proviso to Section 6, excluding only the period during which proceedings were stayed by a court.
Analysis: The acquisition notification under Section 4(1) was published on 8.9.1982, and although the original declaration under Section 6 was made within three years, that declaration had been set aside. The relevant proviso to Section 6 barred any declaration in respect of land covered by the Section 4(1) notification after three years from publication, subject only to exclusion of time during which proceedings were stayed by a court. The stay obtained by the appellant was granted only after the three-year period had already expired, and the stay relating to adjoining land could not be used for the appellant's land. The High Court's directions permitting a fresh Section 6 declaration and subsequent acquisition steps within fixed time limits were therefore inconsistent with the statutory bar.
Conclusion: The directions authorising a fresh declaration under Section 6 and further acquisition steps were impermissible and were set aside in favour of the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the proviso to Section 6 imposes an absolute three-year bar on declaration after publication of the Section 4(1) notification, only the period of a court-ordered stay within that period can be excluded, and a declaration cannot be revived or directed after the limitation has already expired.
TaxTMI 
