Petitioners sought a declaration that their land acquisition under the 1894 Act had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as the award was over five years old and compensation was not paid. The Court allowed the writ.
Declaration made that the acquisition in respect of the subject land has lapsed.
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.
$~19
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 12.01.2016
W.P.(C) 9327/2014 & CM 21120/2014
PUNEET LAKRA AND ANR ..... Petitioners
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr P. Chakraborty For the Respondent L&B/LAC : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi For the Respondent nos. 4to6 : Mr Y.R. Sharma
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)
Page 1 of 2
WP(C) 9327/2014
came into effect on 01.01.2014. In this case Award No.16/2005-06 was made on 14.09.2005. He also states that compensation has not yet been paid to the petitioners. Therefore, the requirements of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act have been fulfilled and the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the subject acquisition under the 1894 Act has lapsed. The land in question is situated in village Mubarakpur Dabas, Delhi, in khasra nos. 30//19 (0-18) and 30//20 (0-02) measuring 1 bighas in all.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
JANUARY 12, 2016 kb
Page 2 of 2
WP(C) 9327/2014
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation Act, 2013 lapses an acquisition under the 1894 Act when the award was made more than five years prior to the Act's commencement and compensation
Whether the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the subject acquisition has lapsed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Girish Chhabra vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Ors.Applied¶4
W.P.(C) 2759/2011
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Puneet Lakra
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
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
