The High Court declared that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act regarding the petitioners' land are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act due to non-payment of compensation and delay.
Declaration that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act are deemed to have lapsed; writ petition allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~30
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 14.03.2016
W.P.(C) 1065/2015 & CM No. 1888/2015
DES RAJ ARORA AND ORS. ..... Petitioners
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr S.K. Rout, Ms Yachna Juneja, Dr. N.Pradeep Sharma and Mr Pawan Kumar, Advocates For the Respondents : Mr G.D. Mishra, Standing Counsel for R-2/East DMC Mr Yeeshu Jain, Ms Jyoti Tyagi and Mr Anshuman Nayak for L&B/LAC
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
J U D G M E N T
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)
WP(C) 1065/2015
Page 1 of 3
In this eventuality, it will have to be taken that what the petitioners are stating is correct i.e., that compensation has not been paid to them. The award was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the
WP(C) 1065/2015
Page 2 of 3
2013 Act. All the ingredients of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as interpreted
by the Supreme Court and this Court in the following decisions stand
satisfied:-
acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act in respect of the subject lands are deemed to have lapsed. It is so declared.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
MARCH 14, 2016
rs
WP(C) 1065/2015
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act deemed to have lapsed entitle the petitioners to compensation under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
Whether the elements for application of Section 24(2) are satisfied where award was made more than five years prior to the 2013 Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and OrsApplied¶25
Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3 SCC 183 · Who else cites this
Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and OrsApplied¶26
Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors: (2014) 6 SCC 564 · Who else cites this
Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu and OrsApplied¶27
Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors: Civil Appeal No. 8700/2013
Surinder Singh vs. Union of India and Ors.Applied¶28
Surinder Singh vs. Union of India and Ors.: W.P.(C) 2294/2014
2 provisions across 2 enactments
DES RAJ ARORA AND ORS.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED
SANJEEV SACHDEVA
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
