SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Del) 223

High Court Of Delhi
BALBIR SINGH - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Civil 51 of 1989
Decided On : 05/15/1989

Advocates Appeared:
A.C.JAIN, M.L.Jain, N.S.VASHISHT

Landowners who received compensation or alternate plots must surrender them before taking advantage of the quashing of notifications under the Land Acquisition Act.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition Act - Possession of Land - Summary: The court disposed of multiple writ petitions related to the quashing of proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. The Delhi Administration and the Delhi Development Authority took a fair stand, ensuring that landowners who received compensation or alternate plots would surrender them before taking advantage of the quashing of notifications. The possession of petitioners would not be disturbed unless compensation or alternate plots were surrendered within two months.

Fact of the Case:

The court disposed of multiple writ petitions related to the quashing of proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. The petitioners raised concerns about the respondents attempting to take possession of the land despite a previous judgment quashing the proceedings.

Finding of the Court:

The Delhi Administration and the Delhi Development Authority took a fair stand, ensuring that landowners who received compensation or alternate plots would surrender them before taking advantage of the quashing of notifications. The court directed that the possession of the petitioners would not be disturbed unless compensation or alternate plots were surrendered within two months.

Issues: The issues involved the attempt by the respondents to take possession of the land despite a previous judgment quashing the proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that landowners who received compensation or alternate plots would need to surrender them before taking advantage of the quashing of notifications. The possession of petitioners would not be disturbed unless compensation or alternate plots were surrendered within two months.

Final Decision: The court directed that the possession of the petitioners would not be disturbed unless compensation or alternate plots were surrendered within two months. The writ petitions were disposed of accordingly.

M. K. Chawla,j.

( 1 ) THIS order will dispose of C. Ws. 1373-75/89, 1376/89. 1378-79/89, 1377/89, 1112-13/89. 1126/89, 1281/89, 1065-71/89. 2823/88,51/89, 388/89. 907/89,903/89,945/89,965/89, 1008-9/89, 1598/88, 1252-58 89,1250/89. 894/89, 517/89, 518/89. 495/89. 545/89, 569/89, 578/89, 980-88/89,989-992/89. 2602/88, 2601/88, 2842/88, 2841/88. 2840/8u, 2813/88, 2814. /88. 2815/88. 2816/88,2817/88, 1114-1121/89, 1082-83/89, 1081/89, 1072-79/89,1386/89, 1362/89, 1380/89. Proceedings u/s 5a of the Land Acquisition Actright upto the stage of Award relating to villages, namely. Khan Pur, Deoli@ Devii. Tugbiakabad, Khirkee, Neb Sarai, Said-ula Ajaib, Tigri, Shayoorpur, Satbari, Chattar Pur, Raj Pur Khurd, Maidan Ghari, have been quashed by a Division Bench of this Court in Balak Ram Gupta v. U. O. I. C. W. P. 1639/1985 decided on 14/10/1988/l 8/11/1988. Prayer ofthe petitioners is that in spite of that Judgment, the respondents are trying totake possession of the land.

( 2 ) THE Delhi Administration as also the Delhi Development Authorityhave taken up a very fair stand before us. Their contention is that certainland owners have received compensation and as such they should not beallowed to deal with the land till the compensation is paid back to the Delhiadministration with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the datethey received the payment till the date they have refunded the amount. Thecontention raised is quite fair and is accepted. It is further stated bylearned counsel for the respondents that no effort would be made totake possession of any land from anybody and the possession alreadytaken of these lands will be restored back to the land owners on receiptof the refund of compensation, if made with interest. It is further contended that in certain cases, the land owners have been allotted alternateplots in leiu of their land having been acquired and in those cases the alternate plots must be surrendered before the land owners can take advantage ofthe quashing of the notifications. The counsel for the petitioner accepts thissuggestion of the respondents. Consequently, we direct that The possession ofthe petitioners will not be disturbed except in cases where the compensationhas been received by the land owners or alternate plots have been allotteduntil the compensation amount and the alternate plot is surrendered. Counselfor the petitioners agree that the land owners who have received compensation or have been allotted alternate plots would surrender the same as indicated above within two months from today. All other land owners who haveneither received compensation nor any alternate plot are free to deal withtheir lands the way they like and their possession will not be disturbed bythe respondents. Delhi Administration will see to it that the Revenue recordsare amended accordingly. The proper authority i. e. the Land Acquisitioncollector will receive the refund of compensation with 12 per cent interestper annum as well as the surredder of the alternate plots when and if offered. The writ petitions are disposed of in these terms.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top