Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Delhi Development Authority vs Ranjeet Chawla on 16 January, 2023
Bench: M.R. Shah, C.T. Ravikumar
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 343 OF 2023
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 1456/2023)
(D. No. 4829/2022)
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Appellant(s)
VERSUS
RANJEET CHAWLA AND ORS. Respondent(s)
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2023
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. /2023)
(D. No. 20131/2021)
O R D E R
1. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, SLP (C) D. No. 20131/2021 has been taken on board along with SLP (C) D. No. 4829/2022 and heard today finally.
2. Delay condoned.
3. Leave granted.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order(s) dated 19.07.2016 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition No. 6802 of 2015, by which the High Court has allowed the said Writ Petition preferred by Respondent No.1 herein-original writ petitioner and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by R Natarajan Date: 2023.01.18 Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2013 Act”), the Delhi 17:00:19 IST Reason:
Development Authority as well as the Government of NCT of Delhi have preferred the present appeals.2
5. From the impugned judgment and order(s) passed by the High Court, it appears that the High Court has relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Another vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Others reported in (2014) 3 SCC 183. However, the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation (supra), which has been relied upon by the High Court, has been subsequently overruled by the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal & Ors. Etc. reported in 2020 (8) SCC 129.
6. It is also the case on behalf of the appellants that, being the subsequent purchaser, Respondent No.1 had no locus to challenge the acquisition/lapsing of the acquisition.
7. Reliance is placed on the decisions of this Court in the case of Shiv Kumar and Another vs. Union of India and others, (2019) 10 SCC 229, Delhi Development Authority vs. Godfrey Phillips (I) Ltd. & Ors. [C.A. No.3073 of 2022 decided on 06.05.2022 and Delhi Administration Thr. Secretary, Land and Building Department & Ors. vs. Pawan Kumar & Ors. [C.A. No. 3646 of 2022 decided on 06.05.2022]. However, the aforesaid aspect has not been considered by the High Court as it was not pointed out to the High Court, whether being a subsequent purchaser – Respondent No.1 would have locus to challenge the acquisition/lapsing of the acquisition, is also required to be considered by the High Court on remand.
8. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, both these appeals succeed. The impugned judgment and order(s) passed by the High Court is set aside and the matter is remanded to the High Court to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law and 3 on merits and in the light of the observations made by this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority (supra) as well as any other judgments which may be cited and also the aforesaid three decisions on the locus of Respondent No.1, being the subsequent purchaser.
9. The present appeals are, accordingly, allowed to the aforesaid extent. No costs.
...........................J (M.R. SHAH) ...........................J (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) New Delhi;
January 16, 2023
4
ITEM NO.47 COURT NO.4 SECTION XIV-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SLP (Civil) D. No(s). 4829/2022
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
RANJEET CHAWLA & ORS. Respondent(s)
IA No. 29660/2022 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 29658/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT & IA No. 86447/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. WITH Special Leave Petition D. 20131/2021 Date : 16-01-2023 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR For Parties: Mr. Ashwani Kumar, AOR Mr. Anshay Dhatwalia, Adv.
Mr. Parag Tripathi, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Charu Ambwani, AOR Mr. Bharat Arora, Adv.
Mrs. Mishika Bajpai, Adv.
Mr. Mukesh Sinha, Adv.
Ms. Sujeeta Srivastava, AOR Mr. Vikramjeet Banerjee, ASG Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, Adv.
Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Adv.
Mr. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv.
Ms. Vishakha, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, SLP (C) D. No. 20131/2021 has been taken on board along with SLP (C) D. No. 4829/2022 and heard today finally.
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
5The present appeals are allowed to the extent as indicated in the signed order.
Pending applications stand disposed of.
(R. NATARAJAN) (NISHA TRIPATHI)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed order is placed on the file)