NATWARBHAI MAGAINBHAI PATEL versus COLLECTOR AND ORS.

NATWARBHAI MAGAINBHAI PATEL versus COLLECTOR AND ORS.

Under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, payment of compensation is not a precondition for the utilisation of land vested in the State under Section 10(5).

Parties
Petitioner: Natwarbhai Magajnbhai Patel; Respondents: Collector and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 May 1996
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) / Final Order
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Urban Land (ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, Vacant Land, Compensation, Vesting of Land
Property Law Urban Land (ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 Vacant Land Compensation Vesting of Land

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Natwarbhai Magajnbhai Patel

Petitioner

Collector and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) / Final Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether payment of compensation is required before utilisation of land vested in the State under Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976

Ratio Decidendi

Under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, payment of compensation is not a precondition for the utilisation of land vested in the State under Section 10(5).

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Delay condoned
  • Special Leave Petition dismissed