DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus RAMBIR AND ORS

Citation: [2023] 1 S.C.R. 901 · Decided: 20-01-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
901
901
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
v.
RAMBIR AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No.362 of 2023)
JANUARY 20, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND C.T RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.24(2) –
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 –  High Court relying on the decision in
Pune Municipal Corporation case declared that the acquisition
proceeding initiated under the 1894 Act w.r.t the subject lands is
deemed to have lapsed u/s.24(2) – On appeal, held: Decision in
Pune Municipal Corporation case has been overruled by the decision
of Constitution bench in Indore Development Authority case –
Applying the law laid down in Indore Development Authority and
more particularly, considering the fact that the possession of the
land in question was taken over in the year 2007 and handed over
to the beneficiary department, the impugned judgment passed by
the High Court is set aside.
Indore Development Authority v.Manoharlal 
and Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129 : [2020] 3 SCR 1 –
followed.
Pune Municipal  Corporation  and  Anr. vs.Harakchand
Misirimal Solanki and Ors. (2014) 3 SCC 183 : [2014]
1 SCR 783 – referred to.       
Case Law Reference
[2014] 1 SCR 783   
referred to
Para 2
[2020] 3 SCR 1  
followed
Para 2
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.362 of
2023.
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.12.2017 of the High Court
of Delhi at New Delhi in WP (C) No.5441 of 2017.
   [2023] 1 S.C.R. 901
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
902
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 1 S.C.R.
Atul Kumar, Ms. Sweety Singh, Ms. Archana Kumari, Rahul
Pandey, Avs Kadyan, Rajiv Ranjan, Mishra Saurabh, Ms. Sujeeta
Srivastava, Nishit Agrawal, Ms. Kanishka Mittal, Ms. Vanya Agrawal,
Ashwani Kumar, Anshay Dhatwalia, Ms. Binu Tamta, Ms. Smita Maan,
Nitin Mishra, Ishaan Sharma, Mohit Kumar Gupta, Shekhar Yadav, Ms.
Iti Sharma, Rahul Bhatia, Rachita Kadyan, N. S. Vashist, Gagan Gupta,
Ms. Astha Tyagi, Dinesh Chander Trehan, Ms. Diksha Narula, Advs.
for the appearing parties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgmentand order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in
Writ Petition(C) No. 5441 of 2017 by which the High Court has allowed
the said writ petition 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
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act,
2013 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 2013”), the Delhi Development
Authority (DDA) has preferred the present appeal.
2. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respective parties and having gone through the impugned judgment and
order passed by the High Court, it appears that it was the specific case
on behalf of the LAC/DDA before the High Court and so stated in the
counter filed that the possession of the land in question was taken over
and handed over to the beneficiary department in the year 2007. Despite
the above and relying upon the earlier decision of this Court in the case
of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand
Misirimal Solanki and Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183, the High Court has
declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed
to have lapsed on the ground that the compensation was not tendered to
the original landowners as per Section 31 of the Act, 1894. However,
the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
903
and Anr. (supra) has been specifically overruled by the Constitution
Bench of this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority
Vs. Manoharlal and Ors., (2020) 8 SCC 129. In paragraphs 365 and
366, the Constitution Bench of this Court has observed and held as under:-
“365. Resultantly, the decision rendered in Pune Municipal
Corpn. [Pune Municipal Corpn. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki,
(2014) 3 SCC 183] is hereby overruled and all other decisions in
which Pune Municipal Corpn. [Pune Municipal Corpn. v.
Harakchand Misirimal Solanki, (2014) 3 SCC 183] has been
followed, are also overruled. The decision in Sree Balaji Nagar
Residential Assn. [Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Assn. v. State
of T.N., (2015) 3 SCC 353] cannot be said to be laying down
good law, is overruled and other decisions following the same are
also overruled. In Indore De

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.