M/S. COMPETENT AUTOMOBILES CO. LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2015] 3 S.C.R. 237 · Decided: 26-02-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAMAJIT SEN · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 3 S.C.R. 237 
M/S. COMPETENT AUTOMOBILES CO. LTD. 
A 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 5054 of 2008) 
FEBRUARY 26, 2015 
· [VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.] 
B 
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land C 
Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: 
s.24(2) - Declaration of lapse of acquisition u/s.24(2) - In 
these appeals, questions whether award uls.11 of LA Act, 
1894 was passed on or before 1.1.2009; that compensation 0 
was not paid or possession was not taken over by the 
acquirer were not answered - If the award is over 5 years 
old; the compensation has not been paid; or possession of 
the land has not been taken, the acquisition is liable to be 
quashed - In all these appeals, submission of land owners E 
was that either possession was still with them or 
compensation was not tendered by the State, consequently 
the land owners proposed to initiate proceedings founded 
on s.24 of 2013 Act-Appeal is disposed of without entering 
into merits by granting liberty to the land owners to pray F · 
for revival of the appeals in the event that orders u/s.24 of 
2013 Act are adverse to their interest - Land owners are 
permitted to initiate appropriate proceedings in the proper 
forum/court seeking the benefit ofs. 24 of 2013 Act - Land 
Acquisition Act, 1894. 
G 
Pune Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misrimal 
Solanki (2014) 3 SCC 183: 2014 (1) SCR 783; Union of 
237 
H 
238 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 3 S.C.R. 
A India v. Shiv Raj (2014) 6 SCC 564; Bimla Devi v. State of 
Haryana (2014) 6 SCC 583 - relied on. 
B 
Case Law Reference 
2014 (1) SCR 783 
(2014) 6 sec 564 
(2014) 6 sec 583 
relied on. 
relied on. 
relied on. 
" 
Para 4 
Para 4 
Para 4 
C 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 
· 5054 of 2008. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 25.08.2005 of the 
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in W. P. (C) No. 4703 of 
D 2002. 
~ 
with 
C.A. Nos. 5050, 5051, 5052, 5053, 5100, 5101-5104, 
E 
5105-5124-, 5125, 5127-5129, 5283 of 2008, 3278, 
3279 and 3280 of 2012. 
· Dhruv Mehta, K. Radhakrishnan, Sanjay Poddar, 
Yashraj Singh Deora, Sapna Sinha, Anuparn Dhurve, 
F Chandra Bhushan Prasad, M. A. Chinnasarny, Manoj 
· Swarup, Sorn Dutt Sharma, Ajay Kumar, Ashish Wad ( for 
J. S. Wad & Co.), P. S. Sudheer, Sudhir Kumar Gupta, 
Dushyant Parashar, Surya Kant, Shankar Divate, Vijay K. 
Jain, Kaveeta Wadia, Shanshak Tripathi, Surya Kant, Indra 
G Sawhney, Kiran Bhardwaj, Sushrna Suri, P. Pararneswaran, 
V. K. Verma, Rachna Srivastava, Utkarsh Sharma, Govind 
Kumar, Anshurnan Nayak, Vishnu B. Saharya, Viresh B. 
· Saharya (for Saharya & Co.}, for the appearing parties. 
H 
The Order of the Court was delivered by 
COMPETENT AUTOMOBILES CO. LTD. v. UNION 
239 
OF INDIA 
VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J. 1. All of these Appeals were A 
• 
admitted before the commencement of the Right to Fair 
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition 
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. After 
commencement thereof, the Appellants changed the tack 
of their challenge - originally framed under the Land B 
Acquisition Act, 1894 - and impugned the acquisition 
proceedings in toto, by evoking the deemed lapse of 
proceedings under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. Any 
determination under this provision must proceed 
sequentially. First, the factum of an Award under Section C 
11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, must be clearly 
established. The said Award must predate the 
commencement of the Act, i.e., 01.01.2014., by at least five 
years (or more), ie., the Award must have been passed on 0 
or before 01.01.2009. This having been established, if 
possession is found to not have been taken, or 
compensation not paid, then the proceedings shall be 
deemed to have lapsed. Thereafter, the appropriate 
Government, if it so chooses, may reinitiate acquisition E 
proceedings in respect of the same land, but under the 2013 
Act's regime. 
· 
2. _Each and every deeming operation under Section 
24(2) requires unambiguously and unvaryingly that a factual F 
conclusion be drawn about the passing of the Award under 
Section 11, of the 1894 Act, on or before 01.01.2009; 
further, the absence of compensation having been paid or 
the absence of possession having been taken by the 
acquirer, either of these, must be a proven point of fact, as G 
a threshold requirement attracting the lapse. 
3. From the record, these Appeals do not 
unambiguously answer these indispensable queries, which 
inarguably must 

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