Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 13.12.2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C)
No 11476 of 2016 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2013”), the Delhi Development Authority has preferred the present appeal.
From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court it appears that though it was the specific case on behalf of the Authority and so stated in the counter that the possession of the land in question was taken on 27.09.2012 and that the original writ petitioner was not the recorded owner and the land absolutely vested in the Gaon Sabha, thereafter the High Court has declared the acquisition with respect to the land in question as deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Act, 2013 solely on the ground that the compensation has not been paid to the petitioner.
3 As observed hereinabove and from the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, the High Court has heavily relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/acquisition-of-land-and-deemed-lapse-under-the-act-2013/
Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, (2014) 3 SCC 183] is hereby overruled and all other decisions in which Pune Municipal Corpn.
Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, (2014) 3 SCC 183] has been followed, are also overruled. The deemed lapse of land acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act takes place where due to inaction of authorities for five years or more prior to commencement of the said Act, the possession of land has not been taken nor compensation has been paid. The consequence of non-deposit is provided in the proviso to Section 24(2)
in case it has not been deposited with respect to majority of landholdings then all beneficiaries (landowners) as on the date of notification for land acquisition under Section 4 of the 1894 Act shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of the 2013 Act.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/civil/taxation-of-engineering-design-drawings-goods-or-services/
In case a person has been tendered the compensation as provided under Section 31(1) of the 1894 Act, it is not open to him to claim that acquisition has lapsed under Section 24(2) due to non-payment or non-deposit of compensation in court. The provisions of Section 24(2) providing for a deemed lapse of proceedings are applicable in case authorities have failed due to their inaction to take possession and pay compensation for five years or more before the 2013 Act came into force, in a proceeding for land acquisition pending with the authority concerned as on 1-1-2014.
Case Title: DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. EMINENT MARKETING PVT. LTD. (2023 INSC 43)
Case Number: C.A. No.-000337-000337 / 2023
