https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172654 A belated Article 226 claim for alternative plot allotment is ordinarily barred by delay and laches where no fresh cause of action arises from repeated representations. The claimant's writ also failed on merits because the sale deed covered different khasra numbers and receipt of compensation did not establish ownership of the specific acquired land. In the absence of clear proof of title to the land identified in the allotment request, no mandamus for alternative allotment could be issued. The writ petition therefore failed both on limitation principles and on the absence of proof of ownership. en-us Mon, 09 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Oct 2015 09:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172654 A belated Article 226 claim for alternative plot allotment is ordinarily barred by delay and laches where no fresh cause of action arises from repeated representations. The claimant's writ also failed on merits because the sale deed covered different khasra numbers and receipt of compensation did not establish ownership of the specific acquired land. In the absence of clear proof of title to the land identified in the allotment request, no mandamus for alternative allotment could be issued. The writ petition therefore failed both on limitation principles and on the absence of proof of ownership. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 09 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172654