UNION OF INDIA Vs. KRISHAN LAL ARNEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) In these appeals, common order dated 22-3-2002 passed in Letters Patent Appeals by the Division Bench of High Court of Delhi, is under challenge. The facts leading to the filing of these appeals, in brief, are that :

(3.) In all, 14 properties including the properties in question in these appeals, were notified for acquisition on 6th March, 1987 under the provisions of S. 4 and S.17(1) and (4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'). Earlier these properties were requisitioned by the appellants under the Defence of India Rules. The provisions of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Propety Act, 1952 (for short '1952 Act') were going to lapse on 10th March, 1987. These properties were occupied either for offices or for providing residential quarters to the officers. Out of these 14 properties, Banwari Lal and Sons and Shakuntala Gupta had questioned the validity of acquisition proceedings pertaining to property No. 6, Ansari Road, Dariyaganj, New Delhi and property No. 2, Underhill Road, Delhi, respectively by filing separate writ petitions. The writ petitions were allowed and acquisition proceedings were quashed including the abovementioned notification of 6th March, 1987. These matters attained finality having reached this Court. The respondents in these appeals filed writ petitions challenging the acquisition of their properties under the very Notification. Learned single Judge of the High Court allowed the writ petitions. The appellants questioned the correctness and validity of the orders made by learned single Judge in the Letters Patent Appeals, which were dismissed by the impugned order mainly following earlier judgments in the cases of Banwari Lal and Sons and Shakuntala Gupta.