https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171872 A challenge to a denotification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 failed where the appellant had participated in the consent-based disposal, accepted the benefit of the order preserving possession over the larger extent of land, and raised no timely objection. In that setting, natural justice could not be relied on to undo the arrangement selectively, because a party cannot approbate and reprobate or retain the benefit of a consent order while rejecting its burden. The Court construed the order in light of the parties' conduct and litigation history and found no basis for interference. en-us Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Nov 2015 08:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171872 A challenge to a denotification under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 failed where the appellant had participated in the consent-based disposal, accepted the benefit of the order preserving possession over the larger extent of land, and raised no timely objection. In that setting, natural justice could not be relied on to undo the arrangement selectively, because a party cannot approbate and reprobate or retain the benefit of a consent order while rejecting its burden. The Court construed the order in light of the parties' conduct and litigation history and found no basis for interference. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171872