Court : Supreme Court of India
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8580 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.30212 of 2015) |DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY |Appellant(s) | Versus |SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA 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 poss...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8710 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.24315 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VIKRAM MADHOK 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.8714 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.24322 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS FAKIR CHAND 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.8657 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.10161 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PAWAN KUMAR GARG 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.8684 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.17695 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS JAGDEEP KAUR 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.8706 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.24308 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SATPAL 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.8708 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.24312 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS BATI 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 possess...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8575 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.28857 of 2015) |DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY |Appellant(s) | Versus |MEER SINGH 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 possession, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8654 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.7009 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ISHWAR 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.8646 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.4224 of 2016) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS CHAND 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 possess...
Tag this Judgment!