DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY versus SUKHBIR SINGH & OTHERS

Citation: [2016] 5 S.C.R. 227 · Decided: 09-09-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: KURIAN JOSEPH · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

(2016] 5 S.C.R. 227 
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 
v. 
SUKHBIR SINGH & OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 5811 of2015) 
SEPTEMBER 09, 2016 
[KURIAN JOSEPH AND R. F. NARIMAN, JJ.] 
Right to Fair Co111pensation and Transparency in Land 
Acquisitio11, Rehabilitatio11 and Resettlemem Act, 2013 - s. 24(2) -
Land acquisition pro.ceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed -
Construction of - Held: &ate has no business to expropriate jiwn a 
citizen his property if an award has been made and the necessary 
steps of taking physical possession of !a11d and payment of 
co111pe11sation have not been taken for a period of five years or 
more - Section gets attracted if the acquisition proceeding is not 
co111pleted within five years after pronouncement of the award, either 
because physical possession of the land has not been taken or 
because compensation has not been paid, within the said period of 
five years - Object of the Act, a11d s. 24 in particulm; is that in case 
an award has been made for five years or more, possession ought 
to have been taken within this period, or else it is statutorily 
presumed that the balance between the citizens right to retain his 
own property and the right of the Stale to expropriate it for a public 
purpose gets so disturbed as to make the acquisition proceedings 
lapse - Section 24(2) uses the expression "dee111ed to have lapsed" 
because the Legislature was cognizant of the fact that, in cases 
where compensation has not been paid, and physical possession 
handed over to the State, vesting has taken place, after which land 
acquisition proceediags could be said to have ended - On facts, 
DDA was not ready with compensation payable on the day the mvard 
was pronounced, but only handed over such compensation to the 
Land Acquisition Collector five years after the award was 
pronounced - Land Acquisition Collect01; in its turn, did nothing 
whatsoever to offer the said sum or pay it to the original owners -
On the contrmy, the authorities moved an application on the eve of 
the coming into force of 2013 Act, and by depositing the said a111ount 
of compensation paid to it in the year 2002, only in 2013 - Original 
227 
A 
8 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
., 
H 
228 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016) 5 S.C.R. 
land owners' lands were notified for acquisition in 1961, of which 
possession was taken in 2000; after which the compensation offered 
was neither tendered nor paid to the land owners - Thus, the 
acquisition was non est in accordance with the object sought to be 
achieved bys. 24(2) - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - s. 31. 
Dismissing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 The scheme of the Land Acquisition Act, in so 
far as the making of award and the payment of compensation to 
persons interested, is as follows. On the day fixed, the Collector 
after the inquiry that is contemplated under Section 11, has to 
make an award which must contain the necessary ingredients 
mentioned in Section 11. As soon as the award is made, under 
Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, the Collector is to 
give immediate notice of the award to such of the persons 
interested as are not present personally. This provision, when 
read with Section 31 of the Act, makes it clear that the statutory 
scheme is that the Collector is to tender payment of compensation 
awarded by him to the persons who are interested and entitled 
thereto, according to the award, on the date of making the award 
itself. It is therefore, clear that under the statutory scheme, the 
Collector must be armed with the amount of compensation payable 
to persons interested as soon as the award is made. Such persons 
have to be paid the sum mentioned in the award, it being well 
settled that the award is only an offer which may be accepted or 
rejected by the claimants. If accepted, whether under protest or 
otherwise, it is the duty of the Collector to make payment as 
soon as possible after making the award. It is only in a situation 
where the persons interested refuse to consent to receive monies 
payable, or. there be no person competent to alienate the land, or 
if there be any dispute as to title to receive compensation or its 
apportionment, is the Collector to deposit the amount of 
compensation in the reference court. It is only after these steps 
have been taken that the Collector may take possession of the 
land, which shall thereupon vest absolutely in the Government 
free from all encumbrances. [Paral0][240-A-F] 
1.2 Section 24(1) of 

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