Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN
Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
K. Ponnamal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order dated 19.01.2016 passed in W.P.No.29149 of 2014.
The intra-Court appeal has been filed against the order dated 19.01.2016 passed in WP.No.29419 of 2014. By and in which the petitioner's prayer for the relief of writ of Declaration to declare that the Land Acquisition Proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of the petitioners lands comprised in Survey No.27/4 in Nerkundram Village as lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-Settlement Act, 2013 was allowed.
2. The appellant herein is the 2nd respondent before the Writ Court. The respondents 1 to 7 herein were the petitioners before the Writ Court. Similarly, the respondents 8 & 9 herein are the respondents 1 and 3 before the Writ Court. The 10th respondent is the LR of the deceased 4th respondent.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to according to their litigative status before the Writ Court.
4. It is the case of the writ petitioners/respondents 1 to 7 that, the subject land qua S
Non-deposit of compensation does not automatically result in the lapse of land acquisition proceedings under the Old Act, as clarified by the court.
The court emphasized that the compensation amount being set apart and deposited in a Treasury account was sufficient to escape the rigour of Section 24(2) of the Central Act 30 of 2013.
The deposit of compensation in Government Treasury does not constitute non-payment under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, thus acquisition proceedings cannot lapse.
Subsequent purchasers of land acquired under the 1894 Act cannot claim rights under the 2013 Act as their transactions are void.
Interpretation of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 regarding deemed lapse due to non-payment or non-poss....
Land acquisition proceedings lapse under Section 24(2) when compensation is not paid and possession is not taken for over five years, clarifying definitions of 'paid' and 'deposited'.
The interpretation of Section 24(2) requires both possession and compensation to be considered for deeming land acquisition proceedings as lapsed.
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
