Harbans Singh and ors. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Harbans Singh and ors. vs Union of India and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Nov 08, 1990

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/694802

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/694802
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: M.L. Verma, J.
Decided On: Nov 08, 1990
Case Number: Civil Writ Appeal No. 2828 of 1988
Subject: Property

Case Summary

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

Key legal issue: Property
Acts & sections: Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 11A

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Harbans Singh and ors.

Advocate K.L. Rathee and; Subhash Mittal, Advs

Respondent

Union of India and ors.

Legal References

Acts: Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 11A
Reported In: 43(1991)DLT716

Excerpt

- m.l. verma, j.(1) this writ petition is based on the provisions of section 11.a of the land acquisition act, 1894 as amended in 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'). the provisions of the said section of the said act came into force with effect from 24.9.84, and read as under : '11-a.period within which an award shall be made : (1) the collector shall make an award under section 11 within a period of two years from the date of publication of the declaration and if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the land shall lapse : provided that in a case where the said declaration has been published before the commencement of the land acquisition (amendment) act, 1984 the award shall be made within a period of two years from such commencement.' (2) learned counsel for the petitioner contends that his case is covered by the proviso to the aforesaid section. a couple of dates may be noticed here the notification under section 4 of the act was made on 13.11.59 section 6 notification came on 27.5.67. notices under sections 9 & 10 of the act were issued on 29.12.67. till date the award has not been made. consequently, as per the provisions of the aforesaid section, the entire proceedings in the acquisition of the land in question have lapsed. the same view has been taken by a division bench of our court in the case of smt. lakshmi devi and others v. uoi & others in c.w.p. 2232/89 decided on 16.2.1990. (3) the result is that the writ petition is allowed. the rule is made absolute. no costs. appeal allowed

Full Judgment

M.L. Verma, J.

(1) This writ petition is based on the provisions of Section 11.A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended in 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The provisions of the said Section of the said Act came into force with effect from 24.9.84, and read as under :

'11-A.Period within which an award shall be made : (1) The Collector shall make an award under Section 11 within a period of two years from the date of publication of the declaration and if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the land shall lapse : Provided that in a case where the said declaration has been published before the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 the Award shall be made within a period of two years from such commencement.'

(2) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that his case is covered by the Proviso to the aforesaid Section. A couple of dates may be noticed here The Notification under Section 4 of the Act was made on 13.11.59 Section 6 Notification came on 27.5.67. Notices under Sections 9 & 10 of the Act were issued on 29.12.67. Till date the award has not been made. Consequently, as per the provisions of the aforesaid Section, the entire proceedings in the acquisition of the land in question have lapsed. The same view has been taken by a Division Bench of our Court in the case of Smt. Lakshmi Devi and others v. Uoi & others in C.W.P. 2232/89 decided on 16.2.1990.

(3) The result is that the writ petition is allowed. The rule is made absolute. No costs. Appeal allowed

Same Court & Year Delhi · 1990 Same Parties Harbans Singh and ors. vs Union of India and ors. Same Subject Property Same Judge M.L. Verma, J. Acts & Sections Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 11A

Property