Back
PRASANNA B. VARALE, KRISHNA S. DIXIT
M. Rajesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This intra-court appeal seeks to lay a challenge to a learned Single Judge's order dtd. 4/8/2023 whereby appellants' W.P.No.4748/2018 C/w W.P.No.1130/2021 challenging acquisition of their lands has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants vehemently submits that: the Doctrine of Lapse enacted in Sec. 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013; possession of the subject lands continues with the appellants all through; the appellants have not received any compensation; learned Single Judge erred in invoking delay and laches even when plausible explanation was offered; similarly, the ground of suppression of material facts is wrongly invoked; the ratio in INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs. MANOHAR LAAL, (2020) 8 SCC 129, has been wrongly applied. So arguing he seeks voiding of the impugned order.
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents opposes the appeal drawing attention of the court as to the observations in the INDORE DEVELOPMENT supra; she makes submission in justification of the impugned order and the reasons on which it has been st
The court established that once land is vested in the state following proper acquisition procedures, former owners cannot claim possession or challenge the acquisition based on the Doctrine of Lapse,....
Timely challenges to land acquisition proceedings are essential, and unsubstantiated claims of fraud do not suffice to invalidate completed acquisitions, especially when third-party interests have be....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – If acquiring body/beneficiary was not able to take possession due to pending litigation in a proceeding initiated by land owner, thereafter land owner cannot be....
A subsequent purchaser cannot challenge land acquisition if possession has been taken over before their purchase.
Non-deposit of compensation in court does not result in the lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Act.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Subsequent purchaser has no locus to claim lapse of acquisition proceedings.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – If compensation has not been paid due to inter se dispute between co-owners, thereafter, it will not be open for landowners to make a grievance that once compen....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – To attract Section 24(2) of Act, 2013 twin conditions of not taking possession and not tendering/payment of compensation are required to be satisfied.
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Subsequent purchasers have no locus to challenge acquisition and/or lapsing of acquisition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
