1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5114 OF 2018 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MS RAM JIWANI & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.2484 OF 2023 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 6980/2023 @ Diary No.7054/2023) O R D E R Delay condoned and leave granted in Special Leave Petition (C) Diary No.7054 of 2023. 2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 13.02.2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No.4212 of 2016, by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition preferred by respondent No.1 herein 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 Act, 2013 (“the 2013 Act”, for short), the Delhi Development Authority as well as
2 the Government of NCT of Delhi have preferred the present appeals. 3. From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, it appears and which is not even disputed by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 that the physical possession of the subject land was already taken over. 3.1 However, despite the said finding recorded by the High Court in paragraph 3 of the impugned judgment, thereafter relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of ‘ Pune Municipal Corporation & Ors. vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & Ors.’, reported in (2014) 3 SCC 183 and on the ground that the compensation has not been tendered/paid to the original land owner, the High Court has allowed the writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed. 3.2 The view taken by the High Court is just contrary to the subsequent decision o f the Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of ‘ Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal and Others’ , reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129. 4. In the case of Indore Development
3 Authority (supra), the relied upon decision rendered in Pune Municipal Corporation & Ors. (supra) has been overruled by this Court. 5. In view of the above and, more particularly, considering the fact that in the present case, admittedly, the physical possession of the subject land has been taken and even handed over to the beneficiary Department, namely, Delhi Development Authority, there shall not be any deemed lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. 6. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present appeals succeed. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is hereby quashed and set aside. There shall not be any deemed lapse of the acquisition under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as observed by the High Court in the impugned order. 7. The present appeals are accordingly allowed. No costs. ....................,J. (M.R. SHAH) ....................,J. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) NEW DELHI; 06 APRIL, 2023.
4 ITEM NO.16 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 Civil Appeal No(s). 5114/2018 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Appellant(s) VERSUS MS RAM JIWANI & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 13048/2022 - APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION, IA No. 155864/2018 – CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION, IA No. 13049/2022 - PERMISSION TO PLACE ON RECORD SUBSEQUENT FACTS) WITH Diary No.7054/2023 (XIV-A) (IA No. 53576/2023 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING AND IA No. 53577/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Date : 06-04-2023 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 Ms. Astha Tyagi, AOR Mr. Abhishekaran Roy, Adv. Ms. Manika Tripathy, AOR Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Adv. Mr. Manish Vashist, Adv. Mr. Mahaling Malikarjun Pandarge, Adv. For Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned and leave granted in Special Leave Petition (C) Diary No.7054 of 2023. The present appeals are allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending applications also stand disposed of. (NEETU KHAJURIA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS (NISHA TRIPATHI) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Signed order is placed on the file.)
5
ITEM NO.10 COURT NO.4 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 7054/2023 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-02-2017 in WPC No. 4212/2016 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi) GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. Petitioner(s) VERSUS RAM JIWANI & ANR. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.53576/2023-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.53577/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT) Date : 27-03-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR For Petitioner(s) Ms. Astha Tyagi, AOR Mr. Abhishekaran Roy, Adv. For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Put up on 06.04.2023. To be notified with C.A. No. 5114/2018, which is filed by the DDA against the very same impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court. (R. NATARAJAN) (NISHA TRIPATHI) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITEM NO.41 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR AVANI PAL SINGH IA 155864/2018, in Civil Appeal No(s). 5114/2018 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Appellant(s) VERSUS MS RAM JIWANI & ORS. Respondent(s) Date : 16-04-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr. Vishnu B. Saharya,Adv. M/S. Saharya & Co., AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Mahaling Pandarge,Adv. Mr. Mool Singh,Adv. Mr. Abhijit Sen Gupta,Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Respondent No.1 has already filed the counter affidavit. Service of notice is complete qua respondent Nos.2 and 3 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Learned counsel for appellant and respondent No.1 have not filed statement of case within the prescribed period. Registry is directed to process the matter for being listed before the Hon'ble Court as per rules. Avani Pal Singh Registrar MG
ITEM NO.77 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REGISTRAR RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Civil Appeal No(s). 5114/2018 DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Appellant(s) VERSUS MS RAM JIWANI & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.37431/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.37433/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.37430/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING ) Date : 12-12-2018 This appeal was called on for hearing today. For Appellant(s) Mr.Vishnu B.Saharya,Adv. M/S. Saharya & Co., AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Service is complete qua respondent Nos.2 & 3 but no one has entered appearance on their behalf. Respondent No.1 has filed vakalatnama with Power of Attorney which is not in original. Four weeks’ time, is given to file original Power of Attorney. List the matter again on 12.02.2019. RAJESH KUMAR GOEL Registrar SB
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.10 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 1016/2018 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-02-2017 in WP(C) No. 4212/2016 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Petitioner(s) VERSUS MS RAM JIWANI & ORS. Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.37431/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING and IA No.37433/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.37430/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING ) Date : 11-05-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDU MALHOTRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. S. Sharan,Sr.Adv. Mr. Vishnu B.Saharya,Adv. Mr. Viresh B.Saharya,Adv. For M/S. Saharya & Co., AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Delay condoned. Leave granted. In the meanwhile, there shall be stay of operation of the impugned order. (MADHU BALA) (PARVEEN KUMARI PASRICHA) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER