Pritam and Ors vs.union of India and Ors

Pritam and Ors vs Union of India and Ors

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Dec 20, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1202361

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/1202361
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Dec 20, 2016
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

Pritam and Ors

Respondent

Union of India and Ors

Excerpt

.....land acquisition act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 wp(c) 352/2016 page 1 of 3 act’) and in respect of which award no.18/1987-88 dated 05.06.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners’ land comprised in khasra nos. 2183/1324 (1-02), 65 (1-14) measuring 2 bighas 16 biswas in village tughlakabad, delhi, 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 petitioners. 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; and (iv) surender singh v. union of india and ors.: w.p.(c) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by this court.3. as a result the petitioners are 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. wp(c) 352/2016 page 2 of 3 4. the writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. there shall be no order as to costs. badar durrez ahmed, j ashutosh kumar, j december20 2016 kb wp(c) 352/2016 page 3 of 3

Full Judgment

$~59 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment delivered on:

20. 12.2016 W.P.(C) 352/2016 & CM14642016 PRITAM AND ORS versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Advocates who appeared in this case: ........ Petitioner

s ........ RESPONDENTS

For the... Petitioner

s For the Respondent UOI For the Respondent LAC & L&B : Mr Aashish Gumber : Mr Rajesh Kumar with Mr Pradeep Jha & Ms Santwana : Ms Ruchika Rathi CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) JUDGMENT

1 By way of this writ petition the petitioners seek 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 petitioners, consequently, seek a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 WP(C) 352/2016 Page 1 of 3 Act’) and in respect of which Award No.18/1987-88 dated 05.06.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners’ land comprised in khasra nos. 2183/1324 (1-02), 65 (1-14) measuring 2 bighas 16 biswas in village Tughlakabad, Delhi, 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 petitioners. 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; and (iv) Surender Singh v. Union of India and Ors.: W.P.(C) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by this Court.

3. As a result the petitioners are 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. WP(C) 352/2016 Page 2 of 3 4. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J DECEMBER20 2016 kb WP(C) 352/2016 Page 3 of 3

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2016 Same Parties Pritam and Ors vs Union of India and Ors Same Subject Land Acquisition