https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294997 Land already vested in the State under the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953 could not support a further compensation claim once compensation had been paid under that regime. Final surplus-area orders under the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 also barred repeated claims for the same property after compensation had been received and the orders had attained finality. Withdrawal of the earlier civil suit in appeal, on the footing that the land had already been acquired, operated as an estoppel against a contrary claim. Fraud could be raised in Land Acquisition Act reference proceedings to defeat a repetitive and inconsistent compensation claim. en-us Mon, 24 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 May 2021 08:32:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294997 Land already vested in the State under the Himachal Pradesh Abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953 could not support a further compensation claim once compensation had been paid under that regime. Final surplus-area orders under the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972 also barred repeated claims for the same property after compensation had been received and the orders had attained finality. Withdrawal of the earlier civil suit in appeal, on the footing that the land had already been acquired, operated as an estoppel against a contrary claim. Fraud could be raised in Land Acquisition Act reference proceedings to defeat a repetitive and inconsistent compensation claim. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 24 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294997