https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199837 A fresh declaration under Section 6(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was not invalid merely because it was issued more than three years after the original Section 4(1) notification, where an earlier declaration had already been made and later quashed; the quashing removed its legal effect but did not erase the fact of the earlier declaration. The Court also held that a decree for specific performance against the Corporation, and the related lease arrangement, did not bind the State Government or curtail its independent statutory power to acquire land. The acquisition challenge therefore failed. en-us Wed, 16 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Mar 2018 10:30:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199837 A fresh declaration under Section 6(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was not invalid merely because it was issued more than three years after the original Section 4(1) notification, where an earlier declaration had already been made and later quashed; the quashing removed its legal effect but did not erase the fact of the earlier declaration. The Court also held that a decree for specific performance against the Corporation, and the related lease arrangement, did not bind the State Government or curtail its independent statutory power to acquire land. The acquisition challenge therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 16 Apr 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199837