M. R. SHAH, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
Government of NCT of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Ratiram – 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 dated 13.02.2017 in Writ Petition (C) No. 8685 of 2015 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by the private respondent herein and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed by virtue of 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 has preferred the present appeal.
2. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court and even from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant and others before the High Court, it appears that it was the specific case on behalf of the appellant and other original respondents that the possession of the land in question was taken on 21.03.2007. In paragraphs 6 and 7 in the counter affidavit, it was stated as under:
“6. That as per the record, the land in question, i.e. Khasra No. 17(4-12), 18(3-14), 38(1-12), 41(1-16), 42(1-10) admeasuring 13 bighas 04 biswa
Non-payment or non-deposit of compensation does not lead to a lapse if possession has been taken or if compensation has been paid.
Once possession is taken, there shall be no deemed lapse under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Act, 2013.
The interpretation of Section 24(2) requires both possession and compensation to be considered for deeming land acquisition proceedings as lapsed.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Fact that possession of land in question was taken over on 14.07.1987, there shall not be any deemed lapse of acquisition.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Fact that possession of land in question was taken over on 21.04.2006, there shall not be any deemed lapse of acquisition.
Possession of land and payment of compensation are crucial factors in determining whether there is a lapse under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, ....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Once possession of land in question was taken over on 12.03.1981 then acquisition of land in question is not deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of Right ....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Original writ petitioner cannot be permitted to take benefit of his own conduct/wrong.
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....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Landowners who had refused to accept compensation or who sought reference for higher compensation, cannot claim that acquisition proceedings had lapsed under Se....
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.