Government of NCT of Delhi and Anr. vs Karampal and Anr.

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

2 December 2022

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 8931 of 2022

Result

Allowed

Bench

M.R. Shah, C.T. Ravikumar

Citation

[2022] 15 S.C.R. 827 : 2022 INSC 1248

Headnote

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: s.24(2) – Land Acquisition – It was a specific case of appellant-State that possession was taken on 17.09.2008 and even the name of government was mutated in the revenue records – However relying on decision in Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. and solely on the ground that the amount of compensation was not paid or tendered in accordance with law, High Court declared that the land acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under s.24(2) of the Act, 2013 – Held: Original writ petitioner before the High Court was the subsequent purchaser – As held in Delhi Development Authority v. Godfrey Philips (I) Ltd. & Ors., that subsequent purchaser is not entitled to claim lapsing of acquisition proceedings under the Act, 2013, High Court materially erred in entertaining the writ petition by subsequent purchaser claiming lapsing of the acquisition proceedings under the Act, 2013 – Even otherwise, order of High Court is not sustainable in view of the Constitutional Bench decision of Supreme Court in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. wherein it was held that in case possession was taken but compensation not paid then there is no lapse – High Court order set aside.

Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 – followed.

Delhi Development Authority v. Godfrey Philips (I) Ltd. & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 3073 of 2022 – relied on.

Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors. (2014) 3 SCC 183 : [2014]

1 SCR 783 – referred to.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. R. SHAH, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 1202 of 2017 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by the original writ petitioner – subsequent purchaser and has declared that the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1894”) with regard to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and

View Subscription Plans →