M. R. SHAH, C. T. RAVIKUMAR
Land Acquisition Collector – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Kumar – 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. 3581 of 2015, by which, the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect 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 Land Acquisition Collector & Anr. have preferred the present appeal.
2. Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court it can be seen that by the impugned judgment and order the High Court has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed on the ground that neither the possession of the land in question was taken nor the compensation has been tendered/paid and relying upon the earlier decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183,
Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129 – Applied [Para 3]
Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Section 24(2) of 2013 Act does not give rise to new cause of action to question legality of concluded proceedings of land acquisition.
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.
Non-deposit of compensation in court does not result in the lapse of land acquisition proceedings.
The interpretation and application of Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 are crucial in determining whether there is a deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings based on possession, compensation, and ....
Possession not being taken due to a court stay does not entitle the landowner to claim benefit under Section 24(2) of Act 2013.
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.
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, ....
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 21.04.2006, there shall not be any deemed lapse of acquisition.
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....
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.