Ocular Evidence Prevails Over Medical Findings: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Despite Negative Semen Report & Police Lapses High Court Cannot Pass Inconsistent Orders: Supreme Court Quashes Demolition Order Passed Despite Earlier Restraint In CMDA Regularisation Dispute Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Open University Degrees Obtained Prior To 2017 Cut-Off Must Be A Polluter Before Being Held Absolutely Liable: Supreme Court Sets Aside NGT Order Against Art Of Living Over Yamuna Event, Orders ₹5 Cr Refund Father Cannot Be Deprived Of Minor's Custody Unless Proved Unfit: Allahabad High Court Hands Over 4-Yr-Old Child To Father, Sets Aside Trial Court Order Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Integral To Personal Liberty': Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail As 24 Witnesses Remain Unexamined No Specific Chemical Opinion That Seized Substance Was Ganja: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Under Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Simplicitor No Ground For Externment': Karnataka High Court Quashes Raichur SDM Order Order VI Rule 16 CPC | Defendants Enjoy Greater Latitude In Altering Defence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains Doctrinal Leeway Under CPC Boarding Running Train Not Self-Inflicted Injury: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Denying Compensation Possession Of One Co-Sharer Is Possession Of All: J&K&L High Court Cannot Invoke Article 226 For Registering FIR Or Restoring Water Supply: Kerala High Court Natural Guardian's Sale Of Minor's Property Without Court Nod Is Voidable, Extinguishes If Not Challenged Within 3 Years Of Majority: Madras High Court Orissa High Court Rejects Cancer-Survivor Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused Defect In Served Copy Of Affidavit Not Fatal: Supreme Court Restores Election Petition Challenging Lok Sabha Poll Result, Clarifies Law On Form-25 Attestation

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Demarcation in Land Acquisition Dispute: "A Quarter of a Decade, and it Still Carries On!"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has ordered a fresh demarcation in a long-standing land acquisition dispute, stemming from allegations against a government authority. The case, marked by its complexity and contentious nature, reached its latest chapter on September 22, 2023, when the Supreme Court bench comprising Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia delivered its decision.

The heart of the matter lies in allegations against the respondent authority, which was accused of utilizing land without adhering to the proper acquisition process. This utilization included the construction of a bus stand. The case, which began years ago, culminated in proceedings that led to the quashing of acquisition proceedings. However, the court, mindful of the changed nature of the land, opted not to order the demolition of the construction on the disputed land and instead offered two options: compensation or possession restoration.

The court's observation, "A quarter of a decade, and it still carries on!" underscores the protracted nature of this legal battle.

The bone of contention in the contempt proceedings that followed was the specific land in question. The respondents claimed that there was no bus stand on Khasra No.276, suggesting that it existed on other lands. Conversely, the petitioners contended that the land being offered to them was, in fact, Khasra No.278, not Khasra No.276.

The court carefully considered the demarcation proceedings that took place after the initial judgment and concluded that the respondents had indeed offered Khasra No.276, but it had not been accepted by the petitioners.

While the court acknowledged that the matter had been needlessly prolonged by the respondents, it refrained from categorizing it as contempt. Instead, it exercised its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to put an end to the controversy.

The court's decision is clear: a fresh demarcation by Revenue Authorities is necessary. Depending on the results of this demarcation, compensation will be paid if any construction is found on Khasra No.276, or the land will be restored to the petitioners if it is found unoccupied. The question of whether the petitioners can claim damages for the utilization of Khasra No.276 against the respondents has been left open for future proceedings.

Both parties have been directed to approach the Revenue Authorities for the demarcation, which is set to take place on October 9, 2023, starting at 11:00 a.m.

This decision underscores the importance of settling complex land acquisition disputes and ensuring justice is served even after protracted legal battles.

Date of Decision: 22 September 2023                       

RAKESH KUMAR AGGARWAL [D] BY LR  vs AMIT MOHAN PRASAD & ORS. 

                        

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Rakesh_Kumar_Aggarwal_D_By_Lr_vs_Amit_Mohan_Prasad_on_22_September_2023.pdf"]

Latest Legal News