PANKAJ SETHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Union of India And Ors
Click here to view full judgement.
G.S. Sistani, J. (Oral) - -
(1.)This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner. This writ petition was admitted on 21.11.2016.
(2.)The petitioner seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceedings initiated in respect of the land of petitioner forming part of Khasra No. 1385/2 min (2-17) and 1388 min (2-17) total measuring 5 bighas 14 biswas situated in the revenue estate of village Chhattarpur, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the subject land') are deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'New Act'), as neither the physical possession has been taken nor compensation has been paid to the petitioner.
(3.)As per the writ petition, the subject land along with other land was originally owned by Ved Prakash as per the revenue records. A copy of the Khasra Kirdawari has been placed on record. It is further averred in the writ petition that the subject land was sold by Ved Prakash to Seema Sethi and her husband, Dinesh Chand Sethi by means of three registered sale deeds, all dated 05.01.1996. Dinesh Chand Sethi expired leaving behind his wife Seema Sethi and son Gaurav Sethi. Seema Sethi and Gaurav Sethi sold the subject land to Puneet Sabharwal, Sumeet Sabharwal and R.C.Sabharwal vide GPA and Agreement to Sell dated 02.09.2009. The subject land was further sold by Puneet Sabharwal, Sumeet Sabharwal and R.C. Sabharwal vide GPA and Agreement to Sell dated 02.02.2013 to the petitioner herein. The chain of documents have also been filed along with the writ petition. A notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued on 25.11.1980. A Section 6 declaration was made on 07.06.1985. Thereafter, an Award bearing No. 15/86-87 was made on 05.06.1987. It is the case of the petitioner that neither compensation has been paid to the petitioner nor physical possession has been taken. In fact, reliance is placed on the photographs to show that the entire area is a built up area.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.