AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. versus RAM NEWAJ AND OTHERS

AYODHYA FAIZABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. versus RAM NEWAJ AND OTHERS

Applying Indore Development Authority v Manoharlal, since compensation was deposited with the Treasury and possession had been taken on 07.09.2005, the acquisition proceedings did not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act; therefore the High Court judgment holding a deemed lapse was quashed and set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Ayodhya Faizabad Development Authority and Another; Respondent: Ram Newaj and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment and Order Dated 19.07.2017
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Lapse of Acquisition Proceedings, Deposit of Compensation in Treasury Versus Court, Possession Taken Prior to Commencement of the 2013 Act
Land Acquisition Administrative Law Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Lapse of Acquisition Proceedings Deposit of Compensation in Treasury Versus Court Possession Taken Prior to Commencement of the 2013 Act

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ayodhya Faizabad Development Authority and Another

Appellant

Ram Newaj and Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment and Order Dated 19.07.2017

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands stood lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act
  2. 2 Whether deposit of compensation in the Treasury (and not in Court) results in lapse under Section 24(2)
  3. 3 Whether taking of possession precludes deemed lapse under Section 24(2)

Ratio Decidendi

Applying Indore Development Authority v Manoharlal, since compensation was deposited with the Treasury and possession had been taken on 07.09.2005, the acquisition proceedings did not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act; therefore the High Court judgment holding a deemed lapse was quashed and set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 19.07.2017 quashed and set aside
  • Writ petition dismissed