Supreme Court of India

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusGEETA DEVI

Citation: 2014 INSC 368
Decided: 7 May 2014
Disposal: Dismissed
Bench: B S CHAUHAN

Holding

The appeal is dismissed, affirming that the acquisition proceedings are invalid where Section 5A objections were not considered, and the respondent’s possession stands.

Summary

The Supreme Court considered the appeal of the Union of India challenging the quashing of land acquisition proceedings against land later purchased by Geeta Devi. The original tenure holder had lodged objections under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which the competent authority failed to consider. The acquisition award dated 1987‑88 was set aside, and the respondent was in actual physical possession of the land. The Court noted that the facts were identical to those in Civil Appeals Nos. 5478‑5483 of 2014 and accordingly dismissed the present appeal, upholding the earlier decision that the acquisition could not proceed without due consideration of the objections. No costs were awarded.

Issues considered

Whether objections filed under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, must be considered by the competent authority before acquisition can be effected.
Whether the quashing of acquisition proceedings affects the rights of a subsequent purchaser in actual possession of the land.
Whether the award made in 1987‑88 remains valid in view of the procedural lapse.

Legislation cited

Land Acquisition Act, 1894s. 4, s. 5A

Subjects

Land acquisitionSection 5A objectionsSubsequent purchaserQuashing of acquisition proceedingsSupreme CourtAppeal dismissed

Judgment

                     [2014) 8 S.C.R. 783
                          ..
                  UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                             A
                               v.
                        GEETA DEVI
              (Civil Appeal No. 4374 of 2009)
                        MAY 07, 2014
                                                                    B
     [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. CHELAMESWAR AND
                  M.Y. EQBAL, JJ.]

     Land Acquisition Act, 1894: s.5-'A ...:. Objections filed by
original tenure holder - Not considered by the competent            -e
authority - Actual and physioal possession of land with the
respondent who was the subsequent purchaser of the land -
Award made in 1987-88 - Land acquisition proceedings
quashed - Held: In view of C.A. No. 5478-8312014, State's
appeal is dismissed.                                                D

    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
4374 of 2009.

    From the Judgment and Order dated 11.05.2007 of the
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in W.P. (C) No. 1115of1987.        E

     P. P. Malhotra, ASG, J. S. Attri, Geeta Luthra, Sanjay
Poddar, Vinay Bhasin, Mukul Rohatgi, Gopal Jain, Shyam
Divan, A. Sharan, Sandeep Bajaj, Siddharth Panda, D. S.
Mahra, Anshuman Nayak, Shadman Ali, Gaurav Sharma,                  F
Chetan Chawla, Govind Kumar, Sonia Malhotra, Priyanka
Bharihoke, Yasir Rauf, Pradeep Misra, Daleep Kr. Dhayani, D.
N. Goburdhan, Narendra Goyal, Naina Dubey, Rohit Bhardwaj,
Anil Katiyar, H. S. Raina, Bhargava V. Desai, Shreyas Mehrotra,
R. N. Karanjawala, Manik Karanjawala, Ruby Singh Ahuja,             G
Krishna Hariani, Rohit Sharma, Aakanksha Munjhal,
Karanjawala & Co., S. S. Khanduja, Archana Sharma,
Meenakshi Kalra, Shobha, Yash Pal Dhingra, Indra Sawhney,
Simran Mehta, Arvind Minocha, Veena Minocha, Sumit Bansal,
                               783                                  H
    784       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [2014] 8 S.C.R.


A Ateev Mathur, Richa Oberoi, Jagjit Singh Chhabra,. Pankaj
  Gupta, Anusuya Salwan, S. Janani, Kunal Kohli, G. Umapathy,
  Rakesh      K.    Sharma,     Venkatasubramanian,          S.
  Ramasubramanian, R. Mekhala, P. V. Yogeswaran, Manish
  Kumar, Amit Kumar, Piyush Kaushik, N. S. Vasisht, Gagan
B Gupta, Ateev P. Mathur, Vishnu's. Saharya (for Saharya & Co.),
  for the appearing parties.

          The Order of the Court was delivered by

          DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. 1. In this case the facts are the
C same as contained in Civil Appeal Nos. 5478-5483 of 2014,
  however, it may be mentioned herein that Shrimati Geeta Devi,
  the respondent, is the subsequent purchaser of the land sought
  to .be acquired under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,
  1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 1894') and the original
D tenure holder had filed objections under Section 5A of the Act
  1894, which have not been considered. The proceedings in this
  respect also had been quashed and admittedly, the actual and
  physical possession of the land' is with the respondent and as
  the proceedings had been quashed, the award had been made
E in 1987-1988. Thus, in substance the result would be the same
  as in Civil Appeal Nos. 5478-5483 of 2014.

        The appeal is dismissed in terms of Civil Appeal Nos.
    5478-5483 of 2014. No order as to costs.

F   Devika Gujral                                   Appeal dismissed.

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "Land acquisition"Sign in to search