DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus SHIV RAJ & ORS.

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus SHIV RAJ & ORS.

Applying the Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal, because possession of the land was taken on 21.04.2006, there is no deemed lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act; the High Court's reliance on Pune Municipal Corporation was incorrect, and the impugned judgment is quashed and set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Delhi Development Authority; Respondent: Shiv Raj & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal No. 2934 of 2023 / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court judgment and order quashed and set aside; no deemed lapse of acquisition with respect to the land in question.
Legal Topics
Section 24(2) – Deemed Lapse, Possession Vs Compensation, Precedent Overruling
Land Acquisition Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 Statutory Interpretation Section 24(2) – Deemed Lapse Possession Vs Compensation Precedent Overruling

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Delhi Development Authority

Appellant

Shiv Raj & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal No. 2934 of 2023 / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether acquisition proceedings are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act where possession had been taken but compensation had not been paid
  2. 2 Whether the High Court correctly relied on Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki in light of the Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the Constitution Bench decision in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal, because possession of the land was taken on 21.04.2006, there is no deemed lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act; the High Court's reliance on Pune Municipal Corporation was incorrect, and the impugned judgment is quashed and set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court judgment and order quashed and set aside; no deemed lapse of acquisition with respect to the land in question.

Orders

  • The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is hereby quashed and set aside.
  • There shall not be any deemed lapse of acquisition with respect to the land in question.