TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Land Acquisition Notification Upheld: SC Rules 1960 Encumbrance Valid, Dismissing Appeal but Allowing Compensation Claims.</h1> <h3>Saraswati Devi (D) by L. Rs. Versus Delhi Devt. Authority and Ors</h3> Saraswati Devi (D) by L. Rs. Versus Delhi Devt. Authority and Ors - TMI Issues Involved1. Whether the land in question was an evacuee land on the date of issue of Notification u/s 4 of the LA Act on 07.03.1962Rs.2. Whether the land, if it was an evacuee property, could have been acquired under the lawRs.SummaryIssue 1: Whether the land in question was an evacuee land on the date of issue of Notification u/s 4 of the LA Act on 07.03.1962Rs.The Supreme Court examined the facts and legal provisions to determine the status of the land. The land in question was acquired by the central government u/s 12 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, and became part of the compensation pool u/s 14. The appellant's husband participated in a public auction for the sale of the property, and his bid was accepted on 31.10.1960. However, the full purchase price was paid only in 1980, and the sale certificate was issued on 22.08.1980. The court held that the ownership could have transferred to the appellant only in 1980 when the full purchase price was paid. However, provisional possession given to the appellant's husband in 1960 created an encumbrance in the property, making it subject to acquisition under the LA Act.Issue 2: Whether the land, if it was an evacuee property, could have been acquired under the lawRs.The court examined whether the land, being an evacuee property, could be acquired under the LA Act. The court referred to the legal position that the government cannot acquire its own land unless there are private rights or encumbrances. The court found that an encumbrance was created in 1960 when provisional possession was given to the appellant's husband. Therefore, the land could be acquired under the LA Act. The court also referred to the decision in Madan Lal Nangia (2003) 10 SCC 321, which held that evacuee properties could be acquired for public purposes.ConclusionThe Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court, which set aside the Single Judge's order quashing the acquisition notification. The court found that the land could be acquired under the LA Act due to the encumbrance created in 1960. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. However, the court clarified that the appellant's claim for compensation or any other monetary claim would be considered on its own merits in accordance with the law.
TaxTMI 