Explore the nuanced legal analysis conducted by the Court in a recent case concerning the possession of excess urban land. The Court’s meticulous review of relevant laws and precedents provides valuable insights into the intricate world of property law. Follow along to uncover the key principles and considerations that shaped the Court’s decision in this complex legal matter.
Facts
- Possession of excess urban land was taken over before the Repeal Act came into force
- Writ Petition filed by the Review Petitioner was found to be without substance
- Claim was rejected by the Division Bench
Also Read: Electoral Malpractices in Mayor Election
Decision
- Delay in preferring Review Petition is condoned.
- No error apparent on record justifying interference.
- Special Leave Petition dismissed by the Court.
- Application for listing Review Petition in open Court rejected.
Also Read: Balancing Power and Transparency: Electoral Bonds Struck Down, Disclosure Mandated
Case Title: P. CHANDRIKA Vs. THE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONER OF URBAN LAND CEILING AND URBAN LAND TAX (2022 INSC 313)
Case Number: R.P.(C) No.-000335-000335 / 2022
