- Case Name: Civil Appeal No.4335 of 2023
- Justice Name: Justice Abhay S. Oka
- Date of Verdict: July 13, 2023
– Land acquired by DDA in 1989 under Land Acquisition Act 1894.
– Possession taken in 2006 but compensation not paid.
– In 2015, respondent filed writ petition seeking lapse of acquisition under Section 24(2) of new Act of 2013.
– High Court held acquisition lapsed though land already utilized for metro depot.
Submissions by Respondent:
– Long delay of 1231 days in appeal, no proper explanation by DDA.
– DDA has acquiesced to HC judgment.
– Valuable rights accrued to respondent cannot be defeated due to delay.
– Mere overruling of earlier precedent not enough ground to condone delay.
Submissions by Appellant:
– Land already utilized for public purpose so cannot be held as lapsed now.
– Sufficient cause shown for delay.
– No hard and fast rule to decide sufficient cause, depends on facts of each case.
– Liberal view adopted since land already put to public use.
– Direction to pay compensation under 2013 Act set aside.
– Respondent entitled to compensation under 1894 Act award.
– Though appeal allowed, costs imposed on DDA for casual approach.
– Courts adopt liberal view in condoning delay to serve interests of justice.
– Once land utilized for public purpose, acquisition cannot be easily set aside.
– Rights accrued to parties based on earlier judgments are relevant but not decisive.
– Courts will consider conduct of parties while delivering verdict.