Citation : 2015 Latest Caselaw 3430 Del
Judgement Date : 28 April, 2015
$~45
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 28.04.2015
+ W.P.(C) 8600/2014
MEER SINGH & ORS. ..... Petitioners
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr Aditya Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for respondent Nos.1
& 2.
Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate for respondent No.3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)
1. The counter affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos.1 & 2 handed over
by Mr Yeeshu Jain is taken on record. The learned counsel for the
petitioners does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit and would be relying
on the averments in the writ petition.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that this matter is covered
by the decision of this Court in the case of Girish Chhabra vs. Lt. Governor
of Delhi and Ors.: W.P.(C) 2759/2011 decided on 12.09.2014. He states
that although possession of the subject land has been taken, the award under
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1894 Act')
was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the Right to
Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2013 Act'), which
came into effect on 01.01.2014. In this case Award No.75/83-84 was made
on 09.12.1983. He also states that compensation has not yet been paid to
the petitioner. Therefore, the requirements of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act
have been fulfilled and the petitioner is entitled to a declaration that the
subject acquisition under the 1894 Act has lapsed. The land in question is
situated in Village Mehrauli in Khasra No.74//11/2 (0-14) measuring 14
biswas in all.
3. Admittedly, though physical possession of the subject land has been
taken on 21.12.1983, compensation has not been paid to the petitioner. The
Award is also more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013
Act. Consequently, the decision of this Court in Girish Chhabra (supra)
applies on all fours and the subject acquisition has lapsed.
4. The writ petition is allowed by declaring that the acquisition in respect
of the subject land has lapsed. There shall be no order as to costs.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J APRIL 28, 2015 st
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!