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

2025 Supreme(Del) 846

2025:DHC:1088
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
VIBHU BAKHRU, ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, JJ.
Balwan Singh and Others – Appellants
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Another – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 16525 of 2024 
Decided On : 21-02-2025
Advocates Appeared : 
For the Appellant : J.B. Mudgil
For the Respondents : Sanjay K. Pathak, K.K. Kiran Pathak, Sunil K. Jha, M.S. Akhtar, Smita Maan

Limitations under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act are strict; applications must be filed within three months from the award date, not from the date of knowledge.

Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 28A - Dismissal of application for redetermination of compensation on grounds of limitation - Court held that limitation period is three months from the date of award, excluding time for obtaining a copy - Legislative intent is to advance equity among landowners. (Paras 1, 29)

(B) Benefit of enhanced compensation under Section 28A is confined to those who apply within the permissible time, irrespective of knowledge of prior awards - Courts reinforced that all applicants must be vigilant in asserting their rights. (Paras 9, 30)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners claimed compensation enhancement for land acquired for public purposes and filed an application under Section 28A after missing the initial deadline due to lack of knowledge of a previous award. Court evaluated limitation grounds.

Findings of Court:
The court confirmed that petitions under Section 28A must be filed within three months from the award date, irrespective of the applicants' knowledge. The application was dismissed as time-barred.

Issues: Whether the limitation period for filing under Section 28A should start from the award date or the date of knowledge of the award.

Ratio Decidendi: The law states that the limitation period for Section 28A applications is strict and must be adhered to, reaffirming that knowledge of prior awards is not sufficient to extend the filing period.

Result: Petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. challenges to land acquisition compensation process. (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. petitioners seek enhanced compensation. (Para 2 , 3 , 8)
3. argument on limitation due to lack of knowledge. (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
4. lac's counter-arguments to petitioners' claims. (Para 12 , 13)
5. interpretation of section 28a of the la act. (Para 14 , 15 , 16)
6. limitations on filing applications under section 28a. (Para 17 , 18 , 19)
7. clarification on who qualifies for notice in compensation applications. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
8. rejection of the petition based on limitation. (Para 28 , 29)
9. possible future applications under section 28a. (Para 30 , 31 , 32)
10. final dismissal of petition. (Para 33)

JUDGMENT :

VIBHU BAKHRU, J.

1. The petitioners have filed the present petition impugning an order dated 16.08.2024 (hereafter the impugned order) passed by respondent no.2 (hereafter LAC), whereby the application preferred by the petitioners under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereafter the LA Act) was dismissed on the ground of limitation.

2. The petitioners also pray that directions be issued to the respondents to pay compensation to the petitioners at the rate of Rs. 26.6 lacs per acre (Rs. 5,52,083.33 per bigha) along with interest as awarded by the Court of the learned Additional District Judge (ADJ) in terms of the order dated 11.11.2016.

3. The principal question that falls for consideration of this court is whether the application filed by the petitioners under Section 28A of the LA Act was barred by limitation.

BRIEF FACTS

4. The petitioners claim that they owned land/had interest in land (hereafter the subject land) located in the revenue estate of village Chhawala.

5. The Notification under Section 4 of the LA Act for acquisition of certain lands including the subject land in the revenue estate of village Chhawala, for public purposes namely construction of 100 meters wide road under the planned development of Delhi, was published on07.04.2006.

6. The aforesaid Notification was followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the LA Act, which was published on 04.04.2007. Thereafter, an award dated 27.01.2009 [being Award No.11/2008- 09/SW – hereafter the Award] was passed under Section 11 of the LA Act, in respect of certain lands including the subject land. The LAC determined the market value of the lands covered under the Award at Rs. 17,58,400/- per acre, which translates to Rs. 3,66,333.33 per bigha. Various land owners, who were dissatisfied with the compensation, sought a reference under Section 18 of the LA Act for enhancement of compensation. The LAC forwarded the reference to the learned ADJ, Dwarka Courts for adjudication. Although the subject land was also covered under the Notification dated 07.04.2006 issued under Section 4 of the LA Act as well as the Award dated 27.01.2009, the petitioners did not seek any reference for enhancement of compensation at the material time.

7. The learned ADJ disposed of the reference in terms of an order dated 11.11.2016 enhancing the compensation to Rs. 26.5 lacs per acre, which translates to Rs. 5,52,083.33 per bigha.

8. The petitioners claim that the subject land is also similarly located and its market value is no different from the market value of the land owned by other land owners, which were covered under the Notification under Section 4 of the LA Act and the Award. Accordingly, the petitioners filed an application on 22.11.2019 under Section 28A(1) of the LA Act before the LAC. The same was dismissed by the impugned order.

CONTENTIONS ADVANCED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS

9. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that they had no knowledge of the order dated 11.11.2016 enhancing the compensation and therefore, were precluded from filing an application under Section 28A of the LA Act within the time prescribed. It is contended on behalf of the petitioners that the provisions of Section 28A of the LA Act are in the nature of bene

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