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

2017 Supreme(Del) 3998

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
G.S. SISTANI, V. KAMESWAR RAO, JJ.
SURESH CHAND - Petitioner
Versus
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR (NW) - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1191 OF 2016
Decided On : 07-11-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Raj Kishore, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Mr. K.K. Jha, Adv.

The main legal point established is that non-payment of compensation can lead to the lapse of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Headnote:

Compensation - Land Acquisition - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 24(2)

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner claimed ownership of agricultural land and argued that the acquisition proceedings should lapse due to non-payment of compensation. The respondent contended that the acquisition proceedings were complete and final as the petitioners did not challenge them in court.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the compensation had neither been paid to the petitioner nor deposited, and therefore, the acquisition proceedings were deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

Issues: The main issue was whether the acquisition proceedings should be deemed to have lapsed due to non-payment of compensation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the interpretation of Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the mandatory nature of the provision for depositing compensation in court. It also considered previous judgments and held that the acquisition proceedings should be deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

Final Decision: The court declared that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the agricultural land in question were deemed to have lapsed.

JUDGMENT :

G.S. SISTANI, J.

1. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is set out for final hearing and disposal.

2. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Counsel for the petitioner prays that in view of the fact that compensation has not been paid to the petitioner, the acquisition proceedings qua the agricultural land measuring 1 Bigha out of Khasra No. 96/5 Min (4-09), Village Karala, Delhi would stand lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

3. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the agricultural land measuring 1 Bigha out of Khasra No. 96/5 min (4-09) situated in the Revenue Estate of Village – Karala, Delhi. It is contended that initially Sh. Bhoop Singh (1/4 Share), Sh. Rati Ram (1/2 Share) and Sh. Wazir Singh (1/4 Share) were the co-bhumidars of the aforesaid land. It is the case of the petitioner that on 27th February, 1988, Sh. Wazir Singh for himself and being the attorney of Sh. Bhoop Singh and Sh. Rati Ram executed a sale deed of land measuring 1 Bigha (1000 Sq. Yds. approx.) out of the aforesaid land in favour of the petitioner for a valuable consideration amount of Rs.20,000/-. Petitioner paid the entire amount of consideration in cash and the actual physical possession of the aforesaid land was handed over to the petitioner. It is further the case of the petitioner that he could not get the land mutated in his favour for lack of knowledge and ignorance of the law. The said land remained vacant and when with the passage of time the adjoining land was converted in plots the petitioner also bounded the said land. As per the petition, on 16th November, 1990 the petitioner sold the said land to one Sh. Om Prakash, S/o, Sh. Rampat and executed a General Power of Attorney and Cash receipt of Rs.50,000/- involving the said land in his favour. However, no sale deed was ever executed by the petitioner in favour of said Sh. Om Prakash, therefore the transfer remained ineffective and the land remained in his ownership and under the title of the petitioner. On 21st March, 2003, the subject land was notified vide notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act followed by the notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act which was issued on 19th March, 2004. It is further the case of the petitioner that on 2nd January, 2006, the respondent under section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act announced the Award No. 22/2005-06/DC/NW involving the said land under Khasra No. 96/5 min vide item No. 621-624. However, in the award the name of petitioner could not be entered in the absence of mutation entries in favour of the petitioner in revenue records. It is also the case of the petitioner that on 21st February, 2007, the respondent took symbolic possession of the entire Khasra No. 96/5 total admeasuring 5 Bigha and 16 biswas by carrying out demolition of boundary walls. It is the case of the petitioner that since 21st February, 2007, the respondent has neither paid the compensation amount to either the recorded owners, interested persons or the objectors nor deposited the same. Counsel contends that almost 10 years have expired after the date of passing of Award No. 22/2005-06 dated 2nd January, 2006, the respondent neither paid compensation to the petitioner or to any other person nor deposited the compensation amount.

4. Counter-affidavit has been filed respondent / LAC. Para 6 of which reads as under:

“That it is submitted that the lands of Village Karala were notified vide Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 21.3.2003 which was followed by the Notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 19th March, 2004. The Award was also passed vide Award no. 22/2005-06 dated 28.12.2005 and the possession of the lands falling in Khasra number 96/5 (5-16) was also taken in the year 2007 itself on the spot and handed over to t

















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