M. R. SHAH, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
Government of NCT of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Sudesh Verma – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 5258 of 2015 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 1894”) with regard to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act 2013”) the Government of NCT of Delhi and Another have preferred the present appeal.
2. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, it appears that while declaring that the acquisition proceedings under the Act, 1894 is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013, the High Court has heavily relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Another vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Others, (2014) 3 SCC 183.
2.1 However, the High Court has failed to notice and consider the specific case on behalf of the appellants that at th
The possession of land must not have been taken and compensation must not have been paid for the land acquisition proceedings to be deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.
Possession and compensation are crucial factors in determining whether land acquisition proceedings have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisit....
Possession of land taken or compensation paid prevents a lapse under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.
Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 does not give rise to new cause of action to question concluded land acquisition proceedings.
The possession of the land and payment of compensation are crucial in determining the lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act 2013.
The application of Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 does not revive stale claims or reopen concluded proceedings but applies to pending proceedings as on its enforcement date.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – In case a person has been tendered compensation as provided under Section 31(1) of 1894 Act, it is not open to him to claim that acquisition has lapsed under Se....
Obtaining a stay on possession precludes landowners from claiming lapse under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013.
Non-deposit of compensation in court does not result in the lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act.
Land acquisition proceeding will not lapse where possession of land could not be taken by authority due to pending litigation/stay.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.