Delhi Development Authority vs Shiv Raj

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 384

M. R. SHAH, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH
Delhi Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Shiv Raj – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Ms. Manika Tripathy, AOR Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Manish Vashist, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G. Ms. Rukhmini Bobde, Adv. Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Adv. Mr. Prashant Rawat, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava, AOR

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. 8081 of 2015 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the acquisition 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 Delhi Development Authority has preferred the present appeal.

2. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, it appears that it was the specific case on behalf of the appellant before the High Court and even so stated in the counter filed before the High Court that the possession of the land in question was taken over on 21.04.2006. However, thereafter and relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183 , 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 on