Skip to main content

Standing industrial unit cannot be acquired for industrialization: SC

The Supreme Court has scoffed at Haryana's land acquisition policy under which authorities had acquired a fully operational industrial unit and its land for setting up an industrial estate.

 A bench of Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Ranjana P Desai quashed acquisition of the land on which the industrial unit was functioning and said, "We are of the view that there is no justification in acquiring a running industrial unit for industrialization of the area."

 This happened at Kundli, a stone's throw from Delhi, where the authorities in 2005 acquired the land on which an industrial unit of VKM Katha Industries Ltd had been functioning since 1994. The unit was registered as a small-scale industrial unit with the director, industries department, Haryana, and was manufacturing kattha for various tobacco and non-tobacco products.

 On December 21, 2005, Haryana government's industries department issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of certain land in Kundli and Sirsa villages for development of a industrial estate and the land belonging to the company was covered under the said notification.

 The company challenged the acquisition but the Punjab and Haryana high court dismissed its writ petition on July 8, 2008. The company's counsel Guru Krishna argued that the industrial unit was running on the date of acquisition, hence it could not have been acquired by the government to set up an industrial estate.

 The company showed to the court that the construction at the site in question was of excellent quality and also pointed out that similar units running in the area were left out of the acquisition process.

 Justice Sathasivam, authoring the judgment for the bench, said, "On going through the materials placed, we are satisfied that the appellant-company has established that it is a running industrial unit even prior to the notification under the Land Acquisition Act."

 Though Haryana's additional advocate general Manjit Singh Dalal pointed out that the acquisition process was carried out in letter and spirit, the bench said, "In other words, even if the government or the authority concerned excludes the land of the appellant-company, there would not be any difficulty in executing the scheme."

 Article referred: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-08-21/india/41432732_1_land-acquisition-act-industrial-unit-acquisition-process

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...
Post a Comment
Read more

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/
Post a Comment
Read more

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more