B. K. RAVICHANDRA & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

B. K. RAVICHANDRA & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Requisition under the Requisitioning Act/DIA is temporary and the Union’s lawful possession ceased with the lapse of the statutory authority in 1987; where courts have found no valid acquisition and statutory requisition has ended, the State must restore possession and cannot continue indefinite occupation without initiating lawful acquisition; therefore the High Court erred in refusing to direct handover and the Union must restore possession within three months and arbitration may determine compensation for subsequent periods.

Parties
Appellants: B. K. Ravichandra & Ors.; Respondents: Union of India & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
24 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment (civil Appeal No.1460 of 2010) Before the Supreme Court; Final Judgment Delivered by Supreme Court Allowing the Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Requisitioning of Property, Compensation for Requisitioned Property, Article 300 a (protection Against Deprivation of Property), Restitution of Possession
Constitutional Law Property Law Administrative Law Requisitioning of Property Compensation for Requisitioned Property Article 300 a (protection Against Deprivation of Property) Restitution of Possession

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 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B. K. Ravichandra & Ors.

Appellants

Union of India & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment (civil Appeal No.1460 of 2010) Before the Supreme Court; Final Judgment Delivered by Supreme Court Allowing the Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether requisitioning under the Requisitioning Act/DIA is temporary and terminates on lapse of statutory authority, entitling owners to possession
  2. 2 Whether the Union validly acquired the suit lands or its continued occupation after lapse of requisition was lawful
  3. 3 Whether the High Court erred in refusing to direct restoration of possession despite findings against Union’s claim

Ratio Decidendi

Requisition under the Requisitioning Act/DIA is temporary and the Union’s lawful possession ceased with the lapse of the statutory authority in 1987; where courts have found no valid acquisition and statutory requisition has ended, the State must restore possession and cannot continue indefinite occupation without initiating lawful acquisition; therefore the High Court erred in refusing to direct handover and the Union must restore possession within three months and arbitration may determine compensation for subsequent periods.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Respondent Union directed to hand back possession of the suit lands to the appellants within three months
  • Appellants may seek compensation based on fresh fixation of capital value and recurring annual value for different five-year periods for the last 20 years; such claim to be referred to arbitration within four weeks of receipt of the reference