AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 1761
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ohit Sharma, D. Tripathi, Vijay Awana, Rajeev Sharma, Raghuvir Sharma, Vipin Kumar Sharma, Dharmendra Sharma, Arun Kumar, Haji Salimuddin, Ashish Garg, T.L. Garg, Vineet Garg, R.K. Shokeen, Tarjit Singh, Kamini Jaiswal, Ravi Mishra, Govind Goel, Ankit Goel, Shrey Dambhare, Ram Naresh Yadav, Vishnu Bahadur Saharya, Viresh B. Saharya, Binu Tamta, Advs. for Saharya & Co., Ashwani Kumar, Jay Kumar Bhardwaj, Atul Kumar, Sweety Singh, Sheeanshu Shekhar, Bushra Parveen, Archana Kumari, Minali Deswal, Tushar Duneja, Vikas Pandey, Rajiv Sharma, Girish Chandra, Sanchit Garg, Shweta Jain, Pahlad Singh Sharma, Sandeep Singh, Satya Siddiqui, Sarfraz Ahmed Siddiqui, Gopal Singh, Manish Kumar, Varsha Poddar, Vibhu Shankar Mishra, R.R. Rajesh, Ajay Sharma, A.K. Kaul, Raj Bahadur, Kaushik Poddar, Shantanu Sagar, Anmol, A. Deb Kumar, Rabin Majumder, Sameer Jain, Anu Sura, Sanchita, Azra Rehman, B.S. Mathur, Bharat Bhushan, Kaushik, N.S. Dalal, D.P. Singh, Madan Gera, Ashutosh Dubey, Rajshri Dubey, Abhishek Chauhan, V.S. Rawat, Aman Nandrajog, Ashish Tiwari, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, Zeeshan Diwan, Sumeer Sodhi, Arjun Nanda, T. Mahipal, R.K. Singh, Deepa Rai, Kedar Nath Tripathy, Arunabh Chaudhary, Anj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hra, Tushar Bakshi, Richa Kapoor, Mallika Parmar, Gopal Jha, N. Prabhakar, Rachana Srivastava, Monika, Nitya Madhusoodhanan, S.K. Raut, D.S. Kauntae, Megh Pal Singh, Farha Faiz, Rita Gupta, Sanjay Jain, Vinay Arora, Sushma Verma, Rajesh Ranjan, Rashmi Malhotra, Sachin Sharma, Anju Bhattacharya, Deba Prasad Mohanty, Swati Bhardwaj, Neelam Sharma, Diksha Kukrety, Rajesh Kumar Singh, Rekha Pandey, Shailender Saini, Karan Sethi, R.K. Mohanty, Yashraj Singh Deora, Priyadarshinee Singh, Pankaj Bhatia, Nipun Goel, Dhruv Tamta, B.L. Shivare, Dhruv Sharan, Ashish Choudhury, Bharti Tyagi, M.A. Chinnaswamy, K.S. Ghansambandam, C. Rubavathi, V. Senthil Kumar, P. Raja Ram, Harsh Gunchind, Azim H. Laskar, Sachin Das, Sampa Sengupta Ray, Abhijit Sengupta, Priya Hingorani, Bhushan Prasad, Mann Mridul, Krishan Kumar, Pankaj Vivek, Priya Puri, Ranjay Kumar Dubey, Vaishali Soni, Kush Chaturvedi, Rajeev, P. Kausir Prabhu, Vanshaja Shukla, Ritika Jhurani and Dinesh Sharma, Advs. Civil Appeal No. 6113 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 14802 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6115 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 15451 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6118 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 15454 of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appeal No. 6233 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30148 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6237 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30211 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6240 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30224 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6242 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30228 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6246 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30234 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6249 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30238 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6260 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30243 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6264 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30244 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6267 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30275 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6270 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30733 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6272 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30734 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6274 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 30735 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6276 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 31250 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6279 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 31366/2015), Civil Appeal No. 6281 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 31673 of 2015), Civil Appeal No. 6283 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. 6175 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 8817 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6176 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 8818 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6178 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 8819 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6180 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 8820 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6181 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 8829 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6182 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 8836 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6184 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 9061 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6185 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 9184 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6187 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 10009 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6189 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 10495 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6191 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 11339 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6193 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 11349 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6195 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 11356 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6198 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 11372 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6200 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 11380/2016), Civil Appeal No. 6202 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 11383 of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 35159 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6121 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 35160 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6122 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 35163 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6139 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 36421 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6144 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 36792 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6148 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 37159 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6151 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 37657 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6154 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38279 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6158 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38283 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6162 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38284 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6168 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38286 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6171 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38292 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6174 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38295 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6177 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38300 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6179 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38303 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6183 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38354 of 2016), ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....288 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 11404 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6290 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 11479/2016), Civil Appeal No. 6293 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38296 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6295 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38299 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6297 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38355 of 2016), Civil Appeal No. 6299 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38360 of 2016) and Civil Appeal No. 6301 of 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 38366 of 2016) JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Whether the subsequent purchasers/assignees/power of attorney holders, etc., have locus standi to file a petition for a declaration of lapse of acquisition proceedings Under Section 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2013 Act"), is the only issue arising for consideration in these cases. 3. The High Court has taken the view in favour of such people. Thus, aggrieved the NCT of Delhi and Delhi Development Authority are in appeals before this Court. 4. At the outset, we may note that in these c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ointed under that Act shall register any such document unless the transferor produces before such registering officer a permission in writing of the competent authority for such transfer. 9. Penalty - If any person contravenes the provisions of Section 3 or Section 4, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with both. 7. Learned Senior Counsel and other learned Counsel further submitted that the issue is no more res integra in view of the following decisions of this Court: (i) U.P. Jal Nigam, Lucknow Through Its Chairman and Anr. v. Kalra Properties (P) Ltd., Lucknow and Ors., (1996) 3 SCC 124, (ii) Sneh Prabha (Smt.) and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr., (1996) 7 SCC 426, (iii) Meera Sahni v. Lieutenant Governor of Delhi and Ors., (2008) 9 SCC 177, (iv) V. Chandrasekaran and Anr. v. Administrative Officer and Ors., (2012) 12 SCC 133, (v) Rajasthan State Industrial Development and Investment Corporation v. Subhash Sindhi Cooperative Housing Society, Jaipur and Ors., (2013) 5 SCC 427 and 8. U.P. Jal Nigam, Lucknow (supra), is a case where this Court considered the consequences of a transfer of the l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of the declaration Under Section 6 was published. 9. In Sneh Prabha (supra), this Court reiterated the position that any alienation of land after the publication of the notification Under Section 4(1) of the 1894 Act does not bind the Government or the beneficiary under the acquisition. It has also been held that once the possession of the land is taken Under Section 16 of the Act, the land vests with the Government free from all encumbrances and the absolute title is vested in the Government. To quote from paragraph-5: 5. ... It is settled law that any person who purchases land after publication of the notification Under Section 4(1), does so at his/her own peril. The object of publication of the notification Under Section 4(1) is notice to everyone that the land is needed or is likely to be needed for public purpose and the acquisition proceedings point out an impediment to anyone to encumber the land acquired thereunder. It authorises the designated officer to enter upon the land to do preliminaries etc. Therefore, any alienation of land after the publication of the notification Under Section 4(1) does not bind the Government or the beneficiary under the acquisition. On ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d legal proposition that a purchaser, subsequent to the issuance of a Section 4 notification in respect of the land, cannot challenge the acquisition proceedings, and can only claim compensation as the sale transaction in such a situation is void qua the Government. Any such encumbrance created by the owner, or any transfer of the land in question, that is made after the issuance of such a notification, would be deemed to be void and would not be binding on the Government.... 13. On behalf of the Respondents, it has been mainly contended that the subsequent purchasers are persons interested and they have every right to file a case to protect their interests. It was also pointed out that under the Delhi Act, 1972, there is no absolute bar on transfer since Under Section 5, the transfer was possible with the permission of the Competent Authority and that Under Section 5, the Competent Authority cannot refuse to grant the permission except on any of the grounds under Sub-section (3) of Section 5. To quote Section 5: 5. Application for grant of permission for transfer Under Section 4 - xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx (3) The competent authority shall not refuse to grant the permission ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....18. Thus, under the 2013 Act, all persons claiming interest in compensation to be paid on account of the acquisition of land under the 2013 Act, are persons interested. Among others, any person whose primary source of livelihood is likely to be adversely affected is also a person interested. 19. "Land owner" under the 2013 Act is defined Under Section 3(r), which reads as follows: 3(r) "land owner" includes any person,-- (i) whose name is recorded as the owner of the land or building or part thereof, in the records of the authority concerned; or (ii) any person who is granted forest rights under the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 or under any other law for the time being in force; or (iii) who is entitled to be granted Patta rights on the land under any law of the State including assigned lands; or (iv) any person who has been declared as such by an order of the court or Authority; Thus, among others, a person whose name is recorded as owner of the land or building or part thereof in the records of the Authority concerned, is a land owner. 20. "Affected family" has been defined in the 2013 Act ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tandi to challenge the acquisition proceedings. But in the present case, the challenge is not to the acquisition proceeding; it is only for a declaration that the acquisition proceedings have lapsed in view of the operation of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, and therefore, the ratio in those cases has no application to these cases. 23. It is one thing to say that there is a challenge to the legality or propriety or validity of the acquisition proceedings and yet another thing to say that by virtue of operation of a subsequent legislation, the acquisition proceedings have lapsed. 24. In all the decisions cited by the learned Senior Counsel for the Appellants, which we have referred to above, this Court has protected the rights of the subsequent purchaser to claim compensation, being a person interested in the compensation, despite holding that they have no locus standi to challenge the acquisition proceedings. 25. The 2013 Act has made a sea change in the approach on the acquisition of land and compensation thereof. The only lapse under the 1894 Act was Under Section 11A where what would lapse is the... "entire proceedings for the acquisition of land" whereas Under Section 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., participative, informed and transparent process for land acquisition for industrialisation, development of essential infrastructural facilities and urbanisation with the least disturbance to the owners of the land and other affected families and provide just and fair compensation to the affected families whose land has been acquired or proposed to be acquired or are affected by such acquisition and make adequate provisions for such affected persons for their rehabilitation and resettlement and for ensuring that the cumulative outcome of compulsory acquisition should be that affected persons become partners in development leading to an improvement in their post acquisition social and economic status and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. There is a clear indication that the Act proposes to protect the interest of those persons, among others who are affected by the acquisition. The subsequent purchasers/successors, etc., in the cases before us, are all people affected by the acquisition, and therefore, also they are entitled to seek a declaration on lapse under the 2013 Act. 28. The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Suryaprakash and Ors. v. State of ....