Court : Supreme Court of India
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8578 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.30129 of 2015) |DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY |Appellant(s) | Versus |JAGDISH P. KHANNA AND OTHERS |Respondent(s) | JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition(C) No.8467 of 2015. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if in posse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8679 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.17351 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ATTAR SINGH AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if in ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8677 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.17334 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS BRIJESH AGGARWAL AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8577 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.30123 of 2015) |DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY |Appellant(s) | Versus |M/S. NIM INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE(P)LTD. |Respondent(s) | |AND OTHERS | | JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition(C) No.8467 of 2015. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8644 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.2546 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS HARKISHAN AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if in pos...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8709 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.24314 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS KEDAR NATH AND ORS RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if in po...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8703 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.23653 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MAHESH RAHEJA AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8712 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.24317 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS AMAN SINGH AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if in p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8686 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.19031 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS KIRAN RAI AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if in po...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8675 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.17331 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VIJENDER KUMAR AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if ...
Tag this Judgment!