Compulsory land acquisitionRescission of judgmentLocus standiCondonationHousing cooperatives
Tags
Land acquisitionRescission of judgmentHousing cooperativesUrban development
legislation
Statutes Cited
Land Acquisition Act
High Court Rules, 1971
ai analysis
Case Summary
Key Issues
{"issue_text":"Whether condonation was required for late filing of rescission application under rule 449","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Application filed 4 years after becoming aware of judgment"}
{"issue_text":"Whether appellants had locus standi to seek rescission of consent order","issue_type":"procedural","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Appellants were not parties to original proceedings"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Nine housing cooperative societies sought rescission of a 2015 consent order confirming compulsory acquisition of Saturday Retreat Estate, claiming the land had been allocated to them by government after preliminary acquisition notice in 2001. The application was filed 4 years later without condonation.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases