THE WORKING FRIENDS COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. versus THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

Citation: [2015] 12 S.C.R. 1096 · Decided: 12-10-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MADAN B. LOKUR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

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

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 12 S.C.R. 1096 
A 
THE WORKING FRIENDS COOPERATIVE HOUSE 
B 
c 
BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. 
v. 
THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No.8468of2015) 
OCTOBER 12, 2015 
[MADAN B. LO KUR AND R.K. AGRAWAL, JJ.] 
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land 
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013: 
s.24(2)-· Compensation was neither paid to the land owners 
nor was it deposited in the reference court - Therefore, 
0 
compulsory acquisition of the appellant's land under the Land 
Acquisition Act, 1894 lapses in view of the provisions of 
s. 24(2) of the Act of 2013 - Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
E 
HELD: One of the requirements mentioned in 
F 
Section 24(2) of the Act is that the compensation should 
have either been paid to the land owner or should have 
been dEiposited in the Reference Court. The admitted 
position is that the compensation of Rs. 35,52,528/-was 
neither paid to the appellant nor was it deposited in the 
Reference Court. It was admittedly deposited in_ the 
Government Treasury of the State. The deposit was, 
apart from anything else, made only after the Act came 
G into force and was perhaps with a view to get over the 
provisions of Section 24(2) of the Act and the prayer made 
in I.A. No. 4. Unfortunately, even the deposit of the 
compensation amount in the Reference Court on 26th 
June, 2014 does not come to the aid of the appellant 
H 
1096 
WORKING FRIENDS COOP. HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY 1097 
LTD. v. STATE OF PUNJAB 
under any circumstances and cannot be taken as A 
"deemed·payment". [Para 20) [1105-B-D] 
Kamai/ Kaur v. State of Punjab (2015) 3 SCC 206 
- held inapplicable. 
B 
Union of India v. Shiv Raj (2014) 6 SCC 564; 
Bharat Kumar v. State of Haryana (2014) 6 SCC 
586; Bimla Devi v. State of Haryana (2014) 6 SCC 
583; Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association 
v. State of Tamil Nadu (2015) 3 SCC 353: 2014 
c 
(Z) SCR 799; Radiance Fincap (P) Ltd. v. Union 
of India MANU/SC/0064/2015; Arvind Bansal v. 
State of Haryana MANU/SC/0260/2015; Rajiv 
Choudhrie HUF v. Union of India MANU/SC/0261/ 
2015; Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vatika 
D 
Township Pvt. Ltd.(2015) 1 SCC 1; Pune 
Municipal Corporation v. Harakchand Misirimal 
Solanki (2014) 3 SCC 183:2014 (1) SCR 783 -
referred to. 
E 
Case Law Reference 
2014 (1) SCR 783 
referred to. 
Para 8 
(Z014) 6 sec 564 
referred to. 
Para 14 
F 
(2014) 6 sec 586 
referred to. 
Para 14 
(2014) s sec 583 
referred to. 
Para 14 
2014 (7) SCR 799 
referred to. 
Para 15 
G 
(2015) 3 sec 206 
held inapplicable. Para 16 
MANU/SC/006412015 
referred to. 
Para 17 
MANU/SC/0260/2015 
referred to. 
Para 17 
H 
1098 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 12 S.C.R. 
A 
MANU/SC/0261/2015 
referred to. 
Para 17 
(2015) 1 sec 1 
referred to. 
Para 18 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 
B _ ~68 of2015. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 24. 04.2012 passed 
by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at 
Chandigarh in C.W. P. No. 2996of1995. 
C 
Neeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. Adv., Gagan Gupta, for the 
Appellants. 
R. P Bhatt, Sr. Adv., Ajay Bansal, AAG, Jagjit Singh 
Chhabra, Gaurav Yadava, Shubham Bhalla, Ritesh Khatri, 
D Advs., for the Respondents. 
E 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
MADAN B. LOKUR, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. The question for consideration is whether the 
compulsory acquisition of the appellant's land under the Land 
Acquisition Act, 1894 lapses in view of the provisions of Section 
24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in 
F 
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and ResettlementAct, 2013 
(for short 'the Act'). In our opinion, the question must be 
answered in the affirmative and it must be held that the 
compulsory acquisition of the appellant's land has lapsed. 
The Facts 
G 
3. A notification was issued by the State Government under 
Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 12th November, 
1992 proposing to acquire a large chunk of land. This was 
followed by a notification under Section 6 of the Land 
H Acquisition Act issued on 21st July, 1993. Although, a large 
WORKING FRIENDS COOP. HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY 1099 
LTD. v. STATE OF PUNJAB [MADAN B. LOKUR, J.] 
chunk of land was acquired by virtue of these two notifications, A 
the appellant is concerned only with its land admeasuring about 
14.90 acres. 
4. The compulsory acquisition of the appellant's land led 
to proceedings for adjudication of the compensation due from 
B 
the State Government. Accordingly

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