Shri Gopal Krishan vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors.
2005 Latest Caselaw 673 Del

JUDGMENT

B.C. Patel, C.J.

1. In this matter we find that from day one time is being sought by the appellant. We have perused all the orders. On one or the other ground request is made and the Court has granted time on 19.12.2003, 23.2.2004, 21.5.2004, 2.9.2004, 9.9.2004 and 29.10.2004 Even today a request is made for time. The oral request of the party in person is rejected.

2. From the impugned judgment, it is very clear that the land in question came to be acquired for shifting of timber traders under the Planned Development of Delhi. The acquisition proceedings were upheld by the Supreme Court in Civil Writ No. 3837/2003. The Award has been made and also published being Award No. 8/91-92. In the last but one para, the learned Judge has observed as under:-

"In my considered view, allowing relief in the present writ petition would amount to restoring the land to the petitioners of which the possession has been taken over by the respondent DDA after removing the structures thereon in a case where the land stands acquired and acquisition proceedings stand upheld by the Supreme Court. This relief cannot be granted to the petitioner."

3. We find no infirmity in the impugned judgment. Hence, this appeal is required to be dismissed. Ordered accordingly.