Property Law News and Legal Guidance

Property Law

J&K High Court Quashes Collector’s ‘Grossly Misconceived’ Order in Pahalgam Land Acquisition Case

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court quashed an order of the Collector rejecting landowners’ request for a reference under Section 18 of the Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, 1990 in a land acquisition dispute in Pahalgam.

The Court found that authorities failed to prove that the landowners were informed about the acquisition award or paid compensation.

It was observed that the right to seek a reference challenging compensation becomes meaningful only after the landowner has knowledge of the award and receives payment.

Calling the Collector’s order “grossly misconceived and misplaced,” the Court directed authorities to treat the application as valid and forward it to the Principal District Judge, Anantnag.

[Ghulam Mohammad Rah & Ors v. UT of J&K & Ors.]

Read Details / 12 days ago

S PavithraBookmark

Karnataka High Court Halts Probe Against Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Reserves Order in Land Encroachment Case

The Karnataka High Court reserved its judgment on a petition filed by spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar seeking to quash an FIR regarding alleged encroachment of government land in Bengaluru.

The Bangalore Metropolitan Task Force (BMTF) registered the case following a PIL alleging unauthorized construction on public land and storm water drains.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that no specific allegations exist against him and that he neither owns nor encroached upon the land in question.

Conversely, the State maintained that investigation should proceed. The Court extended the existing stay on the investigation until the final disposal of the petition.

[Sri Sri Ravi Shankar v. State of Karnataka & Anr.]

Read Details / 22 days ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Madras High Court Slams Delay in Clearing 507 Acres of Temple Encroachment

The Madras High Court criticized the State's failure to remove encroachments from 507 acres of temple land, observing that a deity’s lack of voting rights should not leave it remediless.

A Bench of Justice P. Velmurugan and Justice B. Pugalendhi held that constitutional governance must not be subordinate to electoral expediency or organized resistance.

The Court noted that even after its 2018 directive, eviction was stalled by protests involving political leaders and legal professionals.

Invoking parens patriae jurisdiction, the Court ordered a comprehensive recovery report every three months and directed the disposal of related civil suits within six months.

[A. Radhakrishnan v. P. Madhusudhanreddy IAS & Ors.]

Read Order / 22 days ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Builders Can’t Use Unfair Contracts to Deny Buyer Compensation: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court ruled that builders cannot use one-sided clauses in flat buyer agreements to deny or limit compensation to homebuyers when possession is delayed.

In a case involving Parsvnath Developers, buyers paid almost the full price, but the builder failed to complete construction on time and did not obtain the required Occupancy Certificate.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) had ordered the builder to finish the project and pay compensation and interest.

The Supreme Court while upholding the same stated that consumer rights and statutory protections override unfair contract terms, and that delayed delivery is a deficiency in service.

[Parsvnath Developers Ltd & Ors. v. Mohit Khirbat & Ors.]

Read Details / 29 days ago

S PavithraBookmark

Telangana High Court Fines HYDRAA ₹1 Lakh for Fencing Private Land, Orders Immediate Removal

The Telangana High Court imposed a ₹1 lakh fine on the Hyderabad Disaster Response and Assets Protection Agency (HYDRAA) for arbitrarily erecting a fence on two private plots in Mallapur despite existing civil court decrees confirming ownership by petitioners.

The Court termed the action “high-handed” and directed the fence’s immediate removal, warning that HYDRAA would have to pay ₹1 lakh per day in additional penalties until compliance.

The fine is to be paid as damages to the petitioners, and the matter is now listed for compliance reporting.

Read Details / 30 days ago

MahiraBookmark

Supreme Court Holds Landowners Not Responsible for Construction Delays Caused by Developer

The Supreme Court ruled that landowners cannot be held responsible for delays in building flats caused by the developer.

Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe said the landowners only allowed the developer to build, get approvals, and sell flats through a Joint Development Agreement and power of attorney, but did not handle construction themselves.

The homebuyers challenged this before the Supreme Court under Section 67 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and the court noted that the agreement clearly protected landowners from construction issues, as the developer alone was in charge.

[Sriganesh Chandrashekaran & Ors. v. M/s Unishire Homes LLP & Ors.]

Read Judgment / a month ago

VishwaBookmark

Kerala High Court Issues Notice on Plea Seeking Eviction of Church from Alleged Waqf Land in Munambam

The Kerala High Court has admitted a petition seeking the eviction of Velankanni Matha Church, Munambam, from land alleged to be waqf property and issued notice to the concerned authorities and the church.

The petitioner claimed that the church had unlawfully occupied around two acres of waqf land, constructed permanent structures, and secured revenue and panchayat entries without valid title.

It was further alleged that despite directions from the district collector to inquire into the encroachment and take action, the tehsildar failed to act.

The petitioner also sought removal of the church buildings from the panchayat asset register and demolition of the alleged unauthorised constructions.

Read Details / a month ago

MahiraBookmark

Delhi High Court: Ancestral Property Not Immune from Attachment Under PMLA

The Delhi High Court has held that ancestral property is not immune from attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, observing that the statute carves out no exception for inherited assets in money laundering proceedings.

A Bench of Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja dismissed an appeal challenging the attachment of a Sainik Vihar property by the Enforcement Directorate.

The appellant contended that the property, purchased by his father in 1991 from legitimate income, could not be treated as “proceeds of crime” merely because he inherited it.

Rejecting the plea, the Court held that ancestral status does not ipso facto grant immunity, and upheld the attachment as property of equivalent value representing alleged proceeds of crime.

Read Details / a month ago

VishwaBookmark

Gujarat High Court: No Concept of Ancestral Property or Birthright Under Muslim Law

The Gujarat High Court rejected a Muslim woman’s plea for a share in her father’s ancestral estate, holding that the concept of ancestral property and right by birth is wholly alien to Muslim law.

The plaintiff had sought a declaration and injunction over ancestral property, claiming entitlement under general inheritance principles.

The Court observed that under Muslim law, ancestral or coparcenary rights do not exist and succession is governed by fixed shares as per religious law.

It held that mere birth in a family does not confer a right to ancestral property in Muslim law and dismissed the suit.

[Yusufbhai Walibhai Patel & Ors. v. Zubedaben Abbasbhai Patel & Ors.]

Read Judgment / a month ago

MahiraBookmark

Karnataka High Court: Mother has No Inheritance Right if Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children

The Karnataka High Court held that when a son dies intestate leaving behind a wife and children, his mother has no right to inherit under Sections 32 and 33 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925.

The Court set aside a trial court order that had refused a succession certificate to the deceased’s wife and children on the ground that the mother was also a legal heir.

It held that if a widow and lineal descendants survive, the estate devolves upon them, and the mother is excluded.

The matter arose from a plea seeking transmission of shares held by the deceased.

[Mrs. Estrida Lucy Janet Vaz & Ors. v. Nil]

Read Judgement / a month ago

MahiraBookmark

Telangana High Court: HYDRAA Cannot Fence Land Without Due Process

The Telangana High Court held that the Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency (HYDRAA) cannot fence land or demolish structures without proper verification and notice.

The case arose after HYDRAA fenced land in Narsingi and demolished a compound wall, citing complaints of encroachment.

The Court said even alleged encroachers are entitled to prior notice under the Telangana Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.

It directed HYDRAA to verify if the land falls within a civil court decree and remove the fencing within 48 hours if it does.

Read Details / a month ago

MahiraBookmark

Partition Decree Executable Only After Stamp Duty Payment: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that a final decree in a partition suit becomes executable only after payment of the requisite stamp duty and proper engrossment on stamped paper.

The Court clarified that the decree holder may deposit stamp duty for the entire property to avoid delay in execution and later recover proportionate shares from other co-sharers.

Emphasising that procedural requirements should not defeat substantive justice, the Court directed the executing court to proceed with execution upon such payment and ensure satisfaction of the decree within one month.

[Sri Sandip Kumar Saha v. Somnath Saha & Ors.]

Read Details / a month ago

MananBookmark

Express Recital for Maintenance under Senior Citizens Act Not Mandatory in Gift Deeds: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that an express recital in a gift deed regarding maintenance liability under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is not mandatory for enforcement of maintenance.

The Court observed that where a transferee accepts immovable property through a valid gift deed, the legal obligation to maintain a senior citizen can arise from the overall transaction and conduct of the parties, even in the absence of an explicit clause.

The ruling clarifies that the purpose of the Act is to ensure maintenance of senior citizens and need not be defeated by insisting on formal recital in the deed itself.

Read order / a month ago

MahiraBookmark

AP High Court Declines Compensation to Occupants of Government Land

The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed compensation claims raised by persons occupying government land, holding that continuous possession, even extending over several decades or more than a hundred years, does not convert an illegal encroachment into a lawful right.

The case arose from petitions filed by residents of Gunadala, Vijayawada, whose structures were impacted by the construction of a railway overbridge and who sought compensation by asserting long-standing occupation.

The Court held that without title, patta, or regularisation, such occupants cannot be treated as landowners under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and are therefore not entitled to compensation.

Read Details / a month ago

Thanush SBookmark

Statutory Authorities can Intervene if Housing Society Delays Membership Decisions: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that statutory authorities are empowered to intervene in the affairs of co-operative housing societies when such societies refuse to decide or indefinitely delay membership applications.

Setting aside a Bombay High Court judgment, the Court observed that while housing societies enjoy autonomy in managing their affairs, such autonomy is not absolute.

If a society fails to act fairly or keeps applications pending for years, statutory remedies under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, can be invoked.

Upholding the Joint Registrar’s direction granting membership to long-standing flat occupants, the Court emphasised that administrative inaction cannot defeat legitimate membership rights.

[Shashin Patel & Anr. v. Uday Dalal & Ors.]

Read Judgment / a month ago

MahiraBookmark