Back
DHARMESH SHARMA
Mukhtyar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Dharmesh Sharma, J.
1. The petitioners are invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, thereby seeking the following reliefs:
II. Issue a Writ, Order or direction in the nature of Mandamus calling for the records of the case and after examining the legality and validity of the same direct the Respondents not to disturb the peaceful, physical, settled possession of the Petitioners in the land admeasuring 01 Bigha.”
BRIEF FACTS:
2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that the petitioners are members of a large family, viz., petitioner No.l namely Mukhtyar Sin
Acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 lapsed due to non-payment of compensation and non-taking of possession, as per Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Possession taken under land acquisition negates the lapse of proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, reaffirming that acquisition processes must adhere to statutory guidelines of compensatio....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and R....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Petitioner's representation under Section 48 of the Act of 1894 was rejected by the Respondents and was not maintainable. The Petitioner's....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that under Section 24(2) of the Fair Compensation Act, the acquisition proceedings would lapse if the possession of the land was not taken and comp....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Period during which interim order passed by Court is/was operative, has to be excluded in computation of five years’ period.
Timely challenges are essential in land acquisition disputes; relief cannot be granted due to inordinate delay as established by the court's reaffirmation of the principle of laches.
A subsequent purchaser can challenge land acquisition proceedings if they demonstrate a legal grievance, particularly where compensation has not been paid and possession has not been taken under the ....
Lapse of land acquisition proceeding – Right which has been lost due to passage of time cannot be revived by virtue of deposit of amount subsequent to orders of High Court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that for the acquisition proceedings to lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, the landowner must prove that possession was not taken and compe....
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
