1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022

(Arising out of SLP(C) No. 3422 of 2020)

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

GAJRAJ SINGH & ORS.

RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Leave granted.

These appeals take exception to the judgment and

order dated 13.02.2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi

at New Delhi in WP(C) No. 8632/2015, whereby the High

Court has declared that the acquisition proceedings in

respect of subject land had lapsed in terms of Section

24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency

in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement

Act, 2013 (for short, ‘the 2013 Act’).

The High Court in the impugned judgment noted that

the possession of the subject land had been taken on

21.03.2007 which fact is supported by possession

Digitally signed by

DEEPAK SINGH

Date: 2022.07.26

17:00:03 IST

Reason:

Signature Not Verified

2

receipt/revenue record.

Additionally, we also record the fact stated on

affidavit by Delhi Development Authority that the

compensation amount was released to the Land and

Building Department, Government of NCT of Delhi on

28.02.2007. It is not necessary to dilate on this

aspect having regard to the fact that the possession had

been taken over by the acquiring authority which entails

in vesting of title in the State.

Considering the exposition of the Constitution Bench

in Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal & Ors.,

reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129, no relief can be granted

to the respondent(s), much less declaring that the

acquisition proceedings had lapsed.

Hence, the impugned judgment and order is set aside

and the appeal stand(s) allowed.

Consequently, the writ petition(s) filed by the

private respondent(s) before the High Court stands

dismissed.

3

4

Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.

…...................J

(A.M. KHANWILKAR)

…...................J

(J.B. PARDIWALA)

New Delhi

July 22, 2022

5

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022

(Arising out of SLP(C) No. 9058 of 2019)

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

BUSHRA KHAN & ORS.

RESPONDENT(S)

O R D E R

Despite service, no appearance has been entered on

behalf of private respondent(s).

Leave granted.

This appeal takes exception to the judgment and

order dated 19.02.2018 passed by the High Court of Delhi

at New Delhi in WP(C) No. 12178/2016, whereby the High

Court has declared that the acquisition proceedings in

respect of subject land had lapsed in terms of Section

24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency

in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement

Act, 2013 (for short, ‘the 2013 Act’).

In the present case, the High Court has noted that

paragraph 5 of the counter affidavit filed by the Land

Acquisition Collector, which had clearly noted that

6

possession of the title land falling in Khasra number

409 (14-15) was taken on 16.07.2017 after preparing the

possession proceedings on the spot and was handed over

to the beneficiary department i.e. Delhi Development

Authority immediately. Despite such a clear stand taken

which is supported by contemporaneous record, the High

Court has declared the acquisition proceedings had

lapsed, which view is clearly in the teeth of the

exposition of the Constitution Bench of this Court in

Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal & Ors.,

reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129.

In the present case, additionally, the High Court

ought not to have entertained the writ petition despite

having noted that the writ-petitioner was a subsequent

purchaser of the subject property, which aspect has also

been answered against the writ petitioner by this Court

in Shiv Kumar & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported

in (2019) 10 SCC 229. On thi