Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.25 seconds)Section 4 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Section 6 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963 [Entire Act]
Ashok Nagar Welfare Association ... vs Union Of India And Others. on 12 July, 1999
8. Counsel for the DDA submits that all the grounds
raised by the petitioner in this writ petition have
already been dealt with by earlier petitions, which
have been filed on behalf of the petitioners by the
association and have attained finality. The plea
raised by the petitioner with regard to the
compensation paid without proper verification of the
title has also been dealt with by the Division Bench in
para 10 of this decision. The Division Bench has also
dealt with another submission made in para 8 of the
writ petition with regard to plea for regularization of
unauthorised colonies, which was dismissed by this
Court and confirmed by the Supreme Court. As far as
the plea raised by the petitioners with regard to the
acquisition proceedings being bad in law a Division
Bench of this court in W.P.(C) No. 1507/1984, Ashok
Nagar Welfare Association Vs. UOI, decided the same
on 21.5.1998. The petitioners admittedly being
members of Ashok Nagar Welfare Association have
participated in all these proceedings. The acquisition
proceedings were upheld in the year 1998. Thereafter
the Association has filed as many as 85 proceedings,
which has led this Court to take a serious view with
regard to conduct of the Ashok Nagar Welfare
Association. The Division Bench has not only
imposed cost in the sum of Rs.10.00 lakhs and Rs.2.5
lakhs, each, on the President of the Association but
the Court has also initiated contempt proceedings
against the President of the Society. The conduct of
the petitioners is no different and they are to be dealt
in the same way. I find no force in the submission of
learned counsel for the petitioner that since the plea
of the petitioners was not appreciated by various
courts it is open for them to re-agitate the question till
their grievances are met. The questions raised by the
petitioners in this writ petition has already attained
finality and the same cannot be reopened. Even
otherwise the land was acquired as far back as in the
year 1982, the possession for which they have filed a
suit for possession also stands dismissed.
Accordingly, present petition is misconceived and
without any merit, the same is dismissed, subject to
LPA 506/2010 Page 17 of 20
repayment of costs of Rs.50,000/ to be paid by each
petitioner to the DDA within ten weeks."
K.K. Modi vs K.N. Modi & Ors on 4 February, 1998
12. Relying on Greenhalgh (supra) and Mcllkenny (supra), the
Supreme Court in the case of K.K. Modi Vs. K.N. Modi & Ors. (1998)
3 SCC 573 held that "It is an abuse of the process of the Court and
contrary to justice and public policy for a party to relitigate the same
issue which has already been tried and decided earlier against him.
Article 239AA in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 4 in The Delhi Development Authority Act, 1957 [Entire Act]
Delhi Layalpur Co-Operative Group ... vs D.D.A. And Anr. [Along With Wp(C) Nos. ... on 16 March, 2006
13. Keeping in view the aforesaid, in particular the judgment of the
Division Bench of this Court in East End Apartments Cooperative
Group Housing Society (supra) and the order of the Supreme Court
dated 23rd March, 2009 in SLP(C) No. 5911/2009, the present appeal
and application are dismissed as an abuse of the process of Court with
costs of Rs.25,000/- to be paid to respondent-DDA within four weeks
from today. The said costs are in addition to the costs imposed by the
learned Single Judge while dismissing the appellants' writ petition.