indu Katariya Vs. Union of India and ors

indu Katariya vs Union of India and ors

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Nov 03, 2014

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1169940

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1169940
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Badar Durrez Ahmed
Decided On: Nov 03, 2014
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

indu Katariya

Respondent

Union of India and ors

Excerpt

.....land acquisition act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 act’) and in respect of which award no.15/198788 dated 05.06.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioner’s land comprised in khasra nos. 642 (5-12), 643(3-09), 644(4-16), 645(416) measuring 18 bighas 13 biswas in village chattarpur shall be deemed to have lapsed.2. it is an admitted position that neither physical possession of the subject lands has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has any compensation been paid to the petitioner. the award was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the 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:(i) pune municipal corporation and anr v. harakchand misirimal solanki and ors: (2014) 3 scc183 (ii) union of india and ors v. shiv raj and ors: (2014) 6 scc564 (iii) sree balaji nagar residential association v. state of tamil nadu and ors: civil appeal no.8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014; (iv) surinder singh vs. union of india and ors.: w.p.(c) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by this court; and (v) 3. gyanender singh and others v. union of india and others: wp(c) 1393/2014 decided on 23.09.2014 as a result the petitioner is entitled to a declaration that the said acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 act in respect of the subject lands are deemed to have lapsed. it is so declared.4. the writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. there shall be no order as to costs. badar durrez ahmed, j v. kameswar rao, j november3 2014 sr

Full Judgment

33(I) THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:

03. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 5949/2014 & CM145402014 INDU KATARIYA ... Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Dinesh Garg with Ms Uditi Khattar For the Respondents : Mr Pawan Mathur for R-3/DDA. Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi for R-4&5/L&B & LAC. Mr Anil Soni with Mr Naginder Benipal for R-1& 2. CORAM:HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking the benefit of section 24(2) 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. The petitioner, consequently, seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 Act’) and in respect of which Award No.15/198788 dated 05.06.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioner’s land comprised in Khasra Nos. 642 (5-12), 643(3-09), 644(4-16), 645(416) measuring 18 bighas 13 biswas in Village Chattarpur shall be deemed to have lapsed.

2. It is an admitted position that neither physical possession of the subject lands has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has any compensation been paid to the petitioner. The award was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the 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:(i) Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3 SCC183 (ii) Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors: (2014) 6 SCC564 (iii) Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors: Civil Appeal No.8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014; (iv) Surinder Singh vs. Union of India and Ors.: W.P.(C) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by this Court; and (v) 3. Gyanender Singh and Others v. Union of India and Others: WP(C) 1393/2014 decided on 23.09.2014 As a result the petitioner is entitled to a declaration that the said acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act in respect of the subject lands are deemed to have lapsed. It is so declared.

4. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J V. KAMESWAR RAO, J NOVEMBER3 2014 SR

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2014 Same Parties indu Katariya vs Union of India and ors Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Badar Durrez Ahmed