<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (11) TMI 880 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310003</link>
    <description>Section 5A confers a valuable right to object to land acquisition, including on suitability and alternative land, but judicial review will not interfere where the objections were duly considered and the selected land was found more suitable on relevant facts. Part VII of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 does not apply to a State-controlled corporation excluded from the statutory definition of &quot;company&quot;, so the special procedure for company acquisitions was inapplicable. Article 142 will not be used to unsettle a lawful acquisition completed after due process and possession, particularly where public purpose has been delayed for years. The acquisition was upheld and the appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Sep 2023 11:49:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=727791" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 880 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310003</link>
      <description>Section 5A confers a valuable right to object to land acquisition, including on suitability and alternative land, but judicial review will not interfere where the objections were duly considered and the selected land was found more suitable on relevant facts. Part VII of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 does not apply to a State-controlled corporation excluded from the statutory definition of &quot;company&quot;, so the special procedure for company acquisitions was inapplicable. Article 142 will not be used to unsettle a lawful acquisition completed after due process and possession, particularly where public purpose has been delayed for years. The acquisition was upheld and the appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310003</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>