Judgment :-

R.M. Lodha, J.

This is an appeal by the appellant against the decision of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court on 31.05.2007, in allowing the Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) preferred by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) against the decision of the Single Judge dated 09.08.2002. Leave to appeal was granted by this Court on 13.07.2009.

2. The facts which form the background of the appeal can be briefly stated as follows : The controversy relates to a piece of land admeasuring 5 Bighas 19 Biswas comprised in Khasra No. 368 situate in the revenue village Masjid Moth, New Delhi. The above property was an evacuee property which was acquired by the central government under Section 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (for short, ‘1954 Act’). On acquisition of that property under Section 12, it became part of the compensation pool under Section 14. By exercise of the power conferred under Section 20, the above property was notified to be sold by way of public auction on 21.06.1958.

3. Dev Prakash Jagwani, the appellant’s husband being a displaced person participated in the public auction for the sale of above property. His bid of Rs. 24,500/- which was the highest bid was accepted. 4. On 31.10.1960, the office of the Assistant Settlement Commissioner (Rural), Ministry of Rehabilitation intimated to the appellant’s husband that it has been decided to give him provisional possession of the auctioned property subject to the terms and conditions stipulated in the indemnity bond and the special affidavit already executed by him. He was also informed that the issue of the above intimation did not constitute transfer of complete title in the property until the final letter of adjustment of compensation was issued.

5. The appellant’s husband is said to have died in 1970. On 16.06.1980, a letter was received from the Ministry of Rehabilitation by a friend of the appellant’s late husband requiring the deposit of a sum of Rs. 14,992/- towards balance price of auction sale within fifteen days. The appellant deposited the balance price.

6. On 22.08.1980, a sale certificate as contemplated by the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Rules, 1955 (for short, ‘1955 Rules’) was issued. On 15.07.1981 the sale certificate was registered with the Sub-Registrar.

7. Between 31.10.1960 when the appellant’s husband was intimated that his bid had been approved in respect of the above property; the payment of full price by the appellant pursuant to the communication dated 16.06.1980; the issuance of sale certificate dated 22.08.1980 and its registration thereof on 15.07.1981, an important event took place. On 07.03.1962, the Delhi Administration, Delhi issued a Notification under Section 4 read with Section 17(1)(iv) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘LA Act’) proposing to acquire a large tract of land admeasuring 198 Bighas and 11 Biswas which included the subject land situate at Masjid Moth for the public purpose, namely, for the plan development of Delhi. Since the urgency clause under Section 17(1)(iv) of the LA Act was invoked, the provisions of Section 5A were dispensed with. The declaration under Section 6 was made and later on award was passed on 30.06.1962.

8. It is the appellant’s case that somewhere in 1981, after the sale certificate was registered, one Mr. Chhugani, a friend of the appellant’s late husband, learnt about the acquisition of the subject land and he made representations to the authorities. It is further case of the appellant that a notice in Land Acquisition Case No. 72/85 was received by Mr. Chhugani for 11.08.1992 which was communicated to the appellant. The appellant initially filed a suit but later on challenged the above acquisition before the Delhi High Court by filing a writ petition on 10.08.1993.

9. The challenge to the acquisition after more than 30 years of the passing of the award was principally founded on the ground that at the relevant time in 1962,