CHHOTUBHAI JASANGBHAI PATEL vs GUJ.INDUSTRIAL DEVT.CORP.. — SLP(C) No. 24381 - 24382/2009
Case under Section III-B. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010230352009
Filing Date
04-Aug-2009
Registration No
SLP(C) No. 24381 - 24382/2009
Diary Number
23035/2009
Order Date
08-Nov-2011
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Dismissed
Last updated 06-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.CHHOTUBHAI JASANGBHAI PATEL
Adv. K. V. SREEKUMAR (Dead / Retired / Elevated)
Respondent(s)
-
1.GUJ.INDUSTRIAL DEVT.CORP..
Adv. ANIP SACHTHEY (Dead / Retired / Elevated)
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-Nov-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-Sep-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
17-Aug-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Jul-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Jul-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
28-Apr-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
08-Mar-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Feb-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
05-Jan-2011
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-May-2010
ROPView PDF
-
12-Apr-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Feb-2010
ROPView PDF
-
19-Feb-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Jan-2010
ROPView PDF
-
25-Jan-2010
ROPView PDF
-
12-Jan-2010
ROPView PDF
-
05-Jan-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Dec-2009
ROPView PDF
-
15-Dec-2009
ROPView PDF
-
06-Nov-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Sep-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Sep-2009
ROPView PDF
-
16-Sep-2009
ROPView PDF
-
04-Aug-2009
Case filed
Registration No. SLP(C) No. 24381 - 24382/2009
-
04-Aug-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
20-Apr-2009
ROPView PDF
-
13-Apr-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Apr-2009
ROPView PDF
-
09-Feb-2009
ROPView PDF
-
27-Jan-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
Case Summary: SLP(C) No. 024381-024382/2009 The Supreme Court dismissed special leave petitions challenging the Gujarat High Court's compensation determination for land acquisition in Manjusar village. The Court upheld the High Court's valuation of Rs.65/- per square meter (with statutory benefits), rejecting the Corporation's challenge to the reliance on two smaller sale instances (Exhibits 174-175) and the 40% development cost deduction applied to determine market value. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts