04 May 2017
Supreme Court
Download

SHIVAJI SHAMRAO PATIL SINCE DECEASED BY HIS L.R. RANJANA SHIVAJI PATIL Vs SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, KOLHAPUR .

Bench: KURIAN JOSEPH,R. BANUMATHI
Case number: C.A. No.-006357-006357 / 2017
Diary number: 18339 / 2014
Advocates: ABHA R. SHARMA Vs


1

Page 1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6357 OF 2017

[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 28055 OF 2014 ] SHIVAJI SHAMRAO PATIL SINCE DECEASED  BY HIS L.R. RANJANA SHIVAJI PATIL & ORS.  Appellant (s)

                               VERSUS THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,  NO. 14, KOLHAPUR, MAHARASHTRA & ORS.   Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T KURIAN, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. On 28.10.2016, this Court passed the following order :-

“The  parties  to  get  instructions  on  the following aspects:- 1)  When was the award passed? 2) Was possession taken subsequent to the award  and  whether  compensation  has  been paid, if so, when? 3) What was the period of the operation of  the  interim  orders  restraining  them from taking possession?”

3. The specific instruction on the second aspect is that though the award is dated 05.02.1988, so far no compensation  has  been  paid.   If  that  is  so,  it squarely  falls  under  the  provision  of  lapse  under Section 24(2) of  The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and

2

Page 2

Resettlement  Act,  2013,  since  no  compensation  has been paid to the appellants despite passing of the award five years prior to 01.01.2014, when the Act came  into  force,  although  according  to  the respondents, it is lying in the Revenue deposit.   4. This Court, in Pune Municipal Corporation & Ors. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & Ors., reported in (2014) 3 SCC 183, made it clear that the deposit made in treasury will not save the lapse referred to under Section  24(2)  unless  the  compensation  is  actually paid  to  the  land  owners  or  deposit  in  terms  of Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 5. Therefore, the proceedings have lapsed.  However, the respondents are granted a period of one year from today to exercise the liberty under Section 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land  Acquisition,  Rehabilitation  and  Resettlement Act, 2013. 6. With the above observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.

No costs.      .......................J.

             [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ R. BANUMATHI ]  

New Delhi; May 04, 2017.