Skip to content


Govt. of Nct of Delhi Thr. Secretary Land and Building Deparment and Ors. Vs. Kailash Chand Gupta and Ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
AppellantGovt. of Nct of Delhi Thr. Secretary Land and Building Deparment and Ors.
RespondentKailash Chand Gupta and Ors.
Excerpt:
.....appellants are aggrieved by the judgment of the high court wherein it has been declared that the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed in view of operation of section 24(2) of the right to fair compensation and transparency in land acquisition, rehabilitation and resettlement act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “2013 act”). we have dealt with a similar issue in govt. of nct of delhi and another v. mahender singh and others (civil appeal no.9596/2016). therefore, in terms of the said judgment, this appeal is dismissed.3. however, dismissal of this appeal shall not stand in the way of the appellants to initiate proceedings afresh for the acquisition of the subject land under the provisions of the 2013 act.4. in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellants.....
Judgment:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9599 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P(C) No.23002 of 2015) GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SECRETARY LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS ... APPELLANT (S) VERSUS KAILASH CHAND GUPTA AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENT (S)

JUDGMENT

KURIAN, J.: Leave granted.

2. The appellants are aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court wherein it has been declared that the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed in view of operation of Section 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “2013 Act”). We have dealt with a similar issue in Govt. of NCT of Delhi and another v. Mahender Singh and others (Civil Appeal No.9596/2016). Therefore, in terms of the said judgment, this appeal is dismissed.

3. However, dismissal of this appeal shall not stand in the way of the appellants to initiate proceedings afresh for the acquisition of the subject land under the provisions of the 2013 Act.

4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellants are given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.

5. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

6. There shall be no order as to costs. ........................................J.

(KURIAN JOSEPH) ......………………………………J.

(ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN) New Delhi; September 22, 2016.-.---------------------- NON-REPORTABLE ----------------------- 2


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //