IMPORTANT POINT
Non-deposit of compensation does not automatically result in the lapse of land acquisition proceedings under the Old Act, as clarified by the court.

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.F.No.27/4, Nerkundram Village and other lands belongs to the petitioners' family. While so, 4(1) Notification under Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter shall be referred to as “Old Act”) was issued on 07.04.1995. The same was challenged by the petitioners' predecessor-in-title by filing a writ petition in WP.Nos.11070 & 11071 of 1996. The said writ petitions were came to be allowed by this Court. In the meanwhile, the respondents have passed an award on 08.06.1998 under Section 11 of the Old Act in award No.Rc.No.LA/A1/1094/91. It is the further case of the petitioners that the award stipulates that the payment of compensation would only be paid after the disposal of WP.Nos.11070 & 11071 of 1996.

5. Thus, the learned counsel for the writ petitioner would contend that though the award was passed on 08.06.1998, neither the compensation amount was paid to them as contemplated under Section 31 of the Old Act, nor possession had been taken from them. Thus, it is the case of the writ petitioners that in view of Section 24 of “The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re-Settlement Act, 2013” [hereinafter shall be referred to as “New Act”], the Land Acquisition proceedings got lapsed. Hence, the writ petitioners/respondents 1 to 7 would contend that the order passed by the Writ Court is well merited and prayed to dismiss the Writ Appeal.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent/ appellant would contend that after the 4(1) Notification dated 07.04.1995, the petitioners have challenged such 4(1) Notification, wherein an interim stay of dispossession was granted, only if possession had not been taken by the Authorities. It is the further contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that, in pursuance of 4(1) Notification, an award under Section 11 has been passed on 08.06.1998, and a compensation of Rs.17,27,095.54/- was determined and the Notice of Award under Section 12(2) was issued to the petitioners on 21.09.1998. By and in which it was informed that the award amount will be kept in Revenue Deposit, and will bear no interest. Therefore, it is the contention of the 2nd respondent/appellant that the award amount has been deposited as early as on 21.09.1998.

7. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent/appellant would further contend that though the acquisition proceedings initially set aside by the learned Single Judge, subsequently, the order of the learned Single Judge was set aside, as a concomitant, acquisition proceedings were upheld and confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, and that possession was taken on 23.05.2006, and the subject land was handed over to the requisition Authority viz., CMRLA. Therefore, it is th