MAJOR GENERAL KAPIL MEHRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants are aggrieved by the judgment dated 24.02.2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, on a reference petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, holding inter alia that they were not entitled to any enhancement in compensation, as fixed by the LAC, of the acquired land bearing Khasra No.1300/1 min. (697) measuring 12 bighas situated in the revenue estate of village Mehrauli, New Delhi and further, that they were not entitled to compensation for wells and trees; or to an additional amount under Section 23(1)(A) from 25.03.1983 till 18.09.1998 or to interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). However, as per the supplementary award, the appellants were held entitled to interest under Section 17(3)(A) of the Act for the period from 19.02.1997 till the date of payment and to compensation for trees, if any.

(2.) As the instant case has a chequered history, the relevant facts need to be narrated before dealing with the respective submissions made by the parties. The appellants were the owners of a parcel of land measuring 12 bighas (i.e. 12096 sq. yards) situated in Khasra No.1300/1 min.(old) 697(new) in Vasant Kunj, Mehrauli, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the said land"). On 13.11.1959, the said land was notified for acquisition, along with the surrounding land under the Act. On 7.12.1966, a declaration was issued under Section 6 of the Act. On 25.03.1983, the aforesaid land was acquired under Award bearing No.83/82-83 and the LAC took possession thereof and handed over the same to the DDA. The appellants challenged the said acquisition proceedings and the award, by filing a writ petition before the High Court, registered as Civil Writ Petition No.1134/1992. The said writ petition was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 30.01.1996 and the acquisition proceedings in respect of the said land were quashed. The respondents were directed to restore possession of the land to the appellants within 90 days with further directions that if, for any reason, it was not possible to restore the possession, then the appellants would be entitled to alternate land of equal area.

(3.) The respondent/DDA challenged the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench dated 30.01.1996 by preferring a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court in November 1996. The said Special Leave Petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 18.11.1996 and as a result, the decision of the Division Bench attained finality. However, as the respondent/DDA did not return the land to the appellants, the latter initiated contempt proceedings by filing CCP No.461/1996 in this Court on 16.12.1996, wherein the Commissioner (Land Management), DDA and the Vice Chairman, DDA were impleaded as respondents. On 19.02.1997, a fresh notification was issued by the Land and Building Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi under Sections 4 and 17 of the Act, proposing to acquire the land of the appellants for the development of Vasant Kunj under the planned development of Delhi.