NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ORS. versus SUBHASH CHANDER KHATRI & ORS. (10/04/2023) — Supreme Court headnote

AI-generated headnote. Verify against the judgment before relying on it. Paragraph numbers refer to the judgment.

Summary

The Delhi High Court, relying on Pune Municipal Corporation, declared an acquisition lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act because compensation had not been paid, while accepting that possession had been taken and the land put to use by the beneficiary department, and directed that the landowner be paid compensation under the 2013 Act. The Supreme Court set the judgment aside, holding that under the Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal, which overruled Pune Municipal Corporation, there is no deemed lapse where possession was taken, and consequently the landowner is not entitled to compensation under the 2013 Act.

Issues

Whether an acquisition lapses under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 where possession was admittedly taken and the land put to use but compensation was not paid, and whether the landowner can then claim compensation under the 2013 Act.

Provisions considered

Section 24(2), Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013Deemed lapse requires that neither possession was taken nor compensation paid; possession having been taken and the land used before the Act came into force, there was no lapse and no entitlement to compensation under the 2013 Act. (¶¶ 2, 2.1, 3)

Held

The High Court itself accepted, and the landowner admitted, that possession of the land had been taken and it had been put to use before the 2013 Act; applying Indore Development Authority, which overruled Pune Municipal Corporation, there is no deemed lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) where possession has been taken even if compensation was not paid, and the landowner is therefore not entitled to compensation under the 2013 Act. (¶¶ 2, 2.1, 3)

Result

Appeal allowed; High Court judgment dated 15.01.2018 in W.P.(C) No. 12143 of 2015 quashed and set aside; the writ petition dismissed; no order as to costs; pending applications disposed of.