Back
DEBANGSU BASAK, MD. SHABBAR RASHIDI
Bhim Sen Mondal – Appellant
Versus
Competent Authority under the National Highways Act, 1956 – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Md. Shabbar Rashidi, J.
1. The appeal is in assailment of an order dated January 16, 2020 passed in W.P. No. 23993 (W) of 2014 negating the claim of the appellant for compensation in respect of the scheduled lands sought to be acquired by the National Highway Authorities.
2. It was submitted that the scheduled lands being part of the plots of lands which were earlier acquired by the State, were not the subject matter of acquisition in the earlier acquisition proceeding concluded in the year 1965. The aforesaid lands were held and possessed by the predecessors of the writ petitioner/appellant even after the acquisition proceeding of 1965. Later on, the appellants purchased the said land from its erstwhile owners by registered deeds of conveyance.
3. Upon such purchase, his name was duly recorded in the revenue records. The appellants have relied upon a certificate of mutation. It was also contended that the name of the appellant was also initially recorded in the LR ROR but subsequently it was deleted and came to be recorded in the name of Asansol Durgapur Development Authority in such ROR. The appellant challenged such recording which was pending with the Land Reforms and Te
Once the land is acquired and vests in the State, it cannot be divested, and subsequent purchasers have no authority to challenge the acquisition proceeding.
Subsequent purchasers of land can only claim compensation based on their vendors' titles and cannot challenge acquisition proceedings initiated under different statutes.
Once land is vested in the government after acquisition, it cannot be returned to the original owners, even if not utilized for the intended purpose.
Subsequent purchasers cannot challenge land acquisition proceedings, and the lapse of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Fair Compensation Act depends on the fulfillment of possession....
Completed land acquisitions under 1894 Act immune from Section 24(2) 2013 Act challenge if possession taken and compensation deposited prior.
Section 24 of the Right to Compensation Act does not apply to acquisitions initiated under the West Bengal Requisition and Acquisition Act; subsequent purchasers can only claim compensation based on ....
No reasonable explanation being given by the petitioners for such inordinate delay, this court should not go into the stale demand of the petitioners after lapse of years.
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
