High Court Orders Expedited Acquisition and Compensation for Unlawfully Dispossessed Landowner in Delhi

127
0
Share:
fir bail transport pay Public T20 World Cup v Pay Video School company Human Rape Sexual Taxable Evidence Tax Statement property students Policy Bail Bail cheques Police Accident Service Claim Trademark Cognizance smuggling NI Eviction Agreement Minister Acid spa Old Delhi HC MBBS DivorceLand Child Evidence Bail Senior Marriage Maintenance Application Property Exam Evidence Divorce doctrine pocso award Medical public Income Tax constable National bailUniversity Property Recovery Evidence Adopted v Payment territorial corporation Bail liability police bank Constitutionality child nature claim domestic Limitation bsnl traffic property railway legal landlords Relationship Citizen property Tax custody phonetic predicate Acquisition forum public asset tax wire eligibility violence physical financial second trademark person Corpus Director TDS policy entertainment parody games recovery 14 tax judiciary claims court bar 34 Raps advertisement employees salary mother rape decisions students 138 divorce bail CBI fir evidence evidence eviction drc lower doctors legal investigation civil copyright

The Delhi High Court, in a landmark judgment, has directed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to expedite the acquisition process and compensate a landowner who was unlawfully dispossessed of his property. The case, involving a dispute over land in Village Bharthal, saw the petitioner seeking redress for land used by DDA for constructing a road and footpath without proper acquisition.

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, in her judgment, emphasized the need for swift legal redressal in cases of unlawful dispossession. “Depriving the appellants of their immovable properties was a clear violation of Article 21 of the Constitution,” the Judge noted, underscoring the gravity of the situation.

The petitioner, the recorded owner of the land, had sought the court’s intervention after DDA constructed a boundary wall and road on the land without due process. While DDA admitted to the mistake and expressed willingness to compensate as per the new Act of 2013, the petitioner demanded an alternate piece of land in lieu of the one used.

The Court, after careful consideration, denied the request for alternate land allotment, citing the lack of a statutory right for such a claim under the prevailing laws. The judgment stressed that the lawful course of action was compensation, not land allotment. “The appellants have been seriously discriminated against… This kind of discrimination not only breeds corruption, but also disrespect for governance,” Justice Arora observed, highlighting the broader implications of such cases.

The Court’s directive for expedited acquisition under the new Act of 2013 and immediate compensation represents a significant step in addressing grievances related to unlawful land dispossession. It also reinforces the legal obligation of state authorities to adhere to due process and provide just compensation.

Date of Decision: 08.12.2023.

VINOD RAJORIA VS DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ORS.

Download Judgment

Share: