{"id":269710,"date":"2022-07-07T11:00:35","date_gmt":"2022-07-07T05:30:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=269710"},"modified":"2022-07-07T11:27:49","modified_gmt":"2022-07-07T05:57:49","slug":"delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

\n

Delhi High Court<\/span>: A Division Bench of Siddharth Mridul and Gaurang Kanth, JJ. dismissed the writ petition as it was filed after almost 62 years challenging the acquisition proceedings whose enhanced compensation has been enjoyed already by the petitioners merely on the basis of coming to knowledge of a recent Supreme Court pronouncement declaring the notifications that led to proceedings being bad in law.<\/p>\n

The facts of the case are such that Late Dewan Kesho Das \u2018predecessor in interest’<\/span> was a displaced person<\/span> under Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954<\/a> \u201cDisplaced Persons Act\u201d successfully participated in the public auction of the \u2018evacuee property’<\/span> in the year 1959 and executed an Indemnity Bond in favour of the President of India for the 10% of bid amount. Being declared as the highest bidder, he was directed to deposit the balance purchase price and even though the provisional possession of the evacuee property was offered the predecessor in interest never took the possession.<\/p>\n

The predecessor-in-interest in year 1959 accepted the offer made by the Settlement Commissioner and offered their verified amount towards the balance purchase price. After adjusting the verified amounts, the sale certificate was finally issued in the year 1961. The Delhi Administration \u2018Respondent 2′ issued the impugned Notifications on 13-11-1959 and 18-08-1960 \u2018notifications’ and accordingly acquired the evacuee property. The predecessor, in interest being aware of the acquisition proceedings in respect of the evacuee’s property accepted the compensation and further sought for enhancement of compensation which was thereby granted.<\/p>\n

It is the case of the petitioner that the Petitioners that they came to know about the Supreme Court judgment Saraswati Devi<\/i> v. Delhi Development Authority<\/i>, (2013) 3 SCC 571<\/a>, in the year 2021 and later sought information from the Respondents under the Right to Information Act, 2005<\/a>. Accordingly, the Petitioners came to know that the impugned Notifications are bad in law as the notices under section 4<\/a> of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894<\/a> had been issued prior to any sort of encumbrance being created on the evacuee property.<\/p>\n

The petitioners, being son of the predecessor in interest herein filed the instant petition challenging the validity of notifications by Respondent 2 under Section 4<\/a> of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894<\/a> regarding acquisition of \u2018evacuee property’.<\/span><\/p>\n

Placing reliance on M S Dewan<\/i> v. UOI<\/i>, 2008 SCCOnLine Del 484<\/a>, the Court noted that in the present case, there is an inordinate delay of almost 62 years in challenging the acquisition proceedings. <\/span>The Petitioners accepted the enhanced compensation without reserving any right whatsoever. The law does not permit a person to approbate and reprobate at the same time. Inordinate delay in making the motion for a writ is indeed adequate ground for refusing to exercise discretion in favour of the petitioner. <\/span>Therefore, now after an inordinate delay of about 62 years after the acquisition, the Petitioners cannot challenge the said acquisition proceedings.<\/p>\n

Further, reliance was placed on Naresh Kumar<\/i> v. UOI, <\/i>(2019) SCC OnLine Del 7741<\/a> wherein it was observed<\/p>\n

\u201cWe are of the view that the petitioners cannot after such a long period seek to rake up the issue of acquisition merely on the basis of some recent pronouncements by the Hon’ble Supreme Court even when they accepted the compensation qua acquisition of the land by neither challenging the acquisition proceedings nor the award but on the other hand were only interested in enhancement of compensation for which they have sought a reference.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n

The Court while dismissing the petition noted that f an axiomatic delay disentitles a party to discretionary relief under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[Nardev Soni v. Union of India, WP (C) No. 7815 of 2022, decided on 05-07-2022<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

Snr. Adv. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Azmat H. Amanullah, Namisha Chaddha, Nitya Sharma, Pritma Suri and Aarzoo Aneja, Advocates, for the Petitioner;<\/p>\n

Jitesh Vikram Srivastava and Prajesh Vikram Srivastava, Advocates, for the Union of India \u2018R1′;<\/p>\n

Manika Tripathy Pandey, Shubham Hasija and Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocates, for R3;<\/p>\n

Yeeshu Jain and Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates, for R 9.<\/p>\n

\n

*Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of Siddharth Mridul and Gaurang Kanth, JJ. dismissed the writ petition as it was filed after <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":269599,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[15971,2728,3066,50062,37799,12981,30274,30456,50061],"class_list":["post-269710","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-acquisition","tag-compensation","tag-delay","tag-evacuee","tag-indemnity-bond","tag-judgment","tag-laches","tag-land","tag-land-acquisition-proceedings"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"A Division Bench dismissed the writ petition as it was filed after almost 62 years challenging the acquisition proceedings\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"A Division Bench dismissed the writ petition as it was filed after almost 62 years challenging the acquisition proceedings\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-07-07T05:30:35+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-07-07T05:57:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-07-07T05:30:35+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-07-07T05:57:49+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"A Division Bench dismissed the writ petition as it was filed after almost 62 years challenging the acquisition proceedings\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years | SCC Times","description":"A Division Bench dismissed the writ petition as it was filed after almost 62 years challenging the acquisition proceedings","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years","og_description":"A Division Bench dismissed the writ petition as it was filed after almost 62 years challenging the acquisition proceedings","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-07-07T05:30:35+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-07-07T05:57:49+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/","name":"Delhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg","datePublished":"2022-07-07T05:30:35+00:00","dateModified":"2022-07-07T05:57:49+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"A Division Bench dismissed the writ petition as it was filed after almost 62 years challenging the acquisition proceedings","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg","width":1331,"height":888,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/07\/delhi-high-court-dismisses-a-writ-petition-challenging-land-acquisition-proceedings-after-a-delay-of-62-years\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court dismisses a writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings after a delay of 62 years"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/delhi_high_court.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":309803,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/12\/20\/despite-substantial-delay-right-to-property-under-article-300a-supports-compensation-claim-calcutta-hc-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":269710,"position":0},"title":"Right to property| Calcutta High Court directs payment of compensation under Article 300A despite substantial delay","author":"Ritu","date":"December 20, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court held that the Municipality's possession without proper acquisition procedures is deemed illegal, and the State is directed to initiate proceedings and pay compensation.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":313110,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/02\/05\/cal-hc-grants-compensation-under-right-to-fair-compensation-and-transparency-in-land-acquisition-act-2013-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":269710,"position":1},"title":"Calcutta High Court grants compensation after lapse of proceedings and utilisation of land for Flyover Construction","author":"Ritu","date":"February 5, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court noted that the previous judgments and record of rights post-vesting supports petitioners\u2019 claim for compensation.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":201052,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/31\/acquisition-proceedings-deemed-to-have-lapsed-under-right-to-fair-compensation-act-2013-on-non-payment-of-compensation\/","url_meta":{"origin":269710,"position":2},"title":"Acquisition proceedings deemed to have lapsed under Right to Fair Compensation Act, 2013 on non-payment of compensation","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 31, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of G.S. Sistani and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, JJ. allowed a writ petition filed for seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings under which the land of the petitioner was acquired have lapsed. A notification was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":207319,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/12\/28\/reference-court-under-land-acquisition-act-1894-is-duty-bound-to-hear-beneficiary-of-acquisition-in-proceedings-seeking-enhancement-of-compensation-payable-to-land-owner\/","url_meta":{"origin":269710,"position":3},"title":"Reference Court under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is duty bound to hear beneficiary of acquisition","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 28, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Krishna S. Dixit, J. while hearing a civil writ petition, quashed Reference Court\u2019s order under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 enhancing compensation payable to land owners without affording a hearing to the beneficiary of acquisition. Petitioner, a beneficiary of land acquisition, challenged\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":265118,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/07\/state-cannot-hide-behind-delay-land-owners-get-compensated-a\/","url_meta":{"origin":269710,"position":4},"title":"“State cannot hide behind delay & laches to evade it’s responsibility after acquiring land. There cannot be a \u2018limitation\u2019 to doing justice”, holds SC; Land Owners get compensated after decades","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"April 7, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a case where the bench of S. Ravindra Bhat* and PS Narsimha, JJ was posed with the question as to whether the State can, merely on the ground of delay and laches, evade its legal responsibility towards those from whom private property has been expropriated, answering in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/State-cannot-hide-behind-delay-laches-to-evade-its-responsibility-after-acquiring-land.-There-cannot-be-a-%E2%80%98limitation-to-doing-justice..png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":265647,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/20\/land-owners-acquisition-compensation-supreme-court-legal-news-updates-research-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":269710,"position":5},"title":"Land owners cannot claim acquisition proceeding is lapsed u\/s. 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation Act where stay was obtained by them vide interim orders: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"April 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench comprising of M. R. Shah* and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., reversed the impugned judgment of Karnataka High Court holding that land owners who approach the acquisition proceedings and obtain interim orders in their favour cannot take benefit under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/MicrosoftTeams-image-135.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/269710","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=269710"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/269710\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/269599"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=269710"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=269710"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=269710"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}