Delhi High Court
Sh. Aditya Narula vs Delhi Development Authority on 29 April, 2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ RSA No.16/2013
% 29th April, 2014
SH. ADITYA NARULA ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. N.K. Aggarwal, Advocate.
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Amit Mehra, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
+ RSA No.16/2013 and C.M. No.1450/2013 (stay)
1. This second appeal is filed by the appellant/plaintiff impugning
the concurrent judgments of courts below; of the trial court dated 26.2.2011
and the first appellate court dated 3.12.2012; by which the suit of the
appellant/plaintiff for injunction with respect to the property bearing no.13,
14 and 14A, Harijan Basti, Village Palam, New Delhi situated in khasra
nos.31/14-17, 31/24-25 and 31/7 has been dismissed.
2. Whereas the case of the appellant/plaintiff is that the
appellant/plaintiff purchased the suit property by means of the
RSA 16/2013 Page 1 of 6
documentation dated 3.3.1990 and 24.3.1998 from the predecessors-in-
interest of the appellant/plaintiff, and who are said to be owners of the suit
property, the respondent/defendant laid out a defence that so far as property
comprising khasra no.31/7 is concerned, the same was acquired vide Award
no.157/86-87 dated 19.9.1980 and so far as khasra no.31/14 is concerned,
the said land was Gaon Sabha land and not private land belonging to either
the appellant/plaintiff or his predecessors-in-interest.
3. The disputed land can be divided, for the purpose of present
judgment, into three parts. One is land comprised in khasra no.31/7, second
is land comprised in khasra no.31/14 or 31/14-17 as per the case of the
appellant/plaintiff and third is land situated in khasra no.31/24-25.
4. So far as first area of land comprised in khasra no.31/7 is
concerned, it is not disputed on behalf of the appellant/plaintiff that the land
comprised in this khasra was acquired by means of the Award no.157/86-87
and which has been proved by the appellant/plaintiff before the courts below
as Ex.PW3/2. The respondent/defendant has also proved this Award as
Ex.DW1/A. This khasra no.31/7 comprised an area of 5 bighas and 12
biswas. Out of 5 bighas and 12 biswas, there is no dispute that the
respondent/defendant had taken possession under the land acquisition
proceedings of an area of 5 bighas and 8 biswas leaving balance 4 biswas of
RSA 16/2013 Page 2 of 6
land which is said to be otherwise acquired and falling within the subject
Award no.157/86-87 but possession of this 4 biswas falling in khara no.31/7
was not taken by the land acquisition authorities. So far as 4 biswas is
concerned, in order to test the bonafides of the appellant/plaintiff, I put a
query to the counsel for the appellant that once the land is acquired, even if
possession was not taken, now possession can always be taken by the
acquiring authority at any time or its successors-in-interest, once the entire
compensation for the acquired land has been deposited. In fact, I have also
so held this in the judgment in the case of Hoshiar Singh and Ors. Vs.DDA
RSA No.25/2002 decided on 22.1.2014.
5. Counsel for the appellant, on instructions from the appellant,
states that the appellant does not claim possession with respect to 4 biswas
of land forming part of khasra No.31/7 and if any part of property of which
the appellant/plaintiff is in possession falls in any part of khasra no.31/7 of 5
bighas and 12 biswas, respondent/defendant is free to take action with
respect to possession of the balance 4 biswas which is about 200 sq yds. It
is further clarified that since it is not disputed on behalf of the
appellant/plaintiff that the entire khasra no.31/7 has been acquired, the
appellant/plaintiff will not object to taking over possession of any part of
khasra no.31/7 by the respondent/defendant.
RSA 16/2013 Page 3 of 6
6. So far as the second track of land which is comprised in khasra
no.31/14-17 is concerned, it is admitted by both the parties that this land is
Gaon Sabha land. Once the land comprised in khasra no.31/14-17 is Gaon
Sabha land, onus of proof was upon the appellant/plaintiff to show that the
land in this khasra number was legally allotted by the Gaon Sabha to the
predecessors-in-interest of the appellant/plaintiff, and from whom the
appellant/plaintiff purchased the land. In the record of trial court, no
evidence has been led as to any legal allotment made by the Gaon Sabha of
the land comprised in khasra no.31/14-17 of village Palam and therefore so
far as this land is concerned, again the appellant/plaintiff would have no
right whatsoever, and the counsel for the appellant states that the
appellant/plaintiff does not claim any right in the land comprised in khasra
no.31/14-17 which belongs to Gaon Sabha.
7. That takes us to the third part of the land which is comprised in
khasra no.31/24-25. There is no case of the respondent/defendant in these
proceedings that this area has been acquired under any Award under the
Land Acquisition Act or that the respondent/defendant claims any right in
this particular khasra number. Therefore, so far as land comprised in khasra
no.31/24-25 is concerned, respondent/defendant will have no right to
dispossess the appellant/plaintiff of course provided the land comprised in
RSA 16/2013 Page 4 of 6
khasra no.31/24-25 is not the subject matter of any Award passed under the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
8. Accordingly, the sum and substance of the discussion with
respect to the issues is that the appellant/plaintiff will have no rights
whatsoever in the land comprised in khasra nos.31/7 and 31/14-17 and if the
appellant/plaintiff is in actual possession of any part of these khasra
numbers, respondent/defendant on demarcation so finds that the
appellant/plaintiff is found on any part of khasra nos.31/7 or 31/14-17, the
respondent can take possession of such land or that authority can which is
entitled in law to take possession of the land in khasra nos.31/7 and 31/14-
17.
9. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of by holding that if the
property of the appellant/plaintiff is actually situated in khasra no.31/24-25
of village Palam, then the respondent/defendant will not be entitled to take
possession of any part of the land comprised in khasra nos.31/24-25, since
the respondent/defendant is not claiming any right to this particular khasra
number. Both the judgments of the courts below are sustained subject to
modification with respect to khasra no.31/24-25, village Palam, New Delhi
by holding that so far as the land in this khasra number is concerned,
respondent/defendant will not have a right to take land comprised in this
RSA 16/2013 Page 5 of 6
khasra number from the appellant/plaintiff. Otherwise the impugned
judgments of the courts below are sustained. It is clarified that before any
steps are taken by the respondent/defendant pursuant to this order, the
respondent/defendant will conduct demarcation as per the total station
method to determine the area and khasra numbers where the
appellant/plaintiff is actually in possession of, and only if the
appellant/plaintiff is in possession of land other than the land comprised in
khasra no.31/24-25 situated in village Palam, New Delhi, the
respondent/defendant will be entitled to take possession of such land from
the appellant/plaintiff. It is required to be noted that these observations in
favour of the appellant/plaintiff are made only so far as khasra no.31/24-25
is concerned because there is no case of the respondent/defendant in these
proceedings that there is any acquisition proceedings with respect to land
comprised in khasra no.31/24-25.
10. No costs.
APRIL 29, 2014 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.
Ne
