Skip to main content

Court stay to be counted in land acquisition cases: HC

In a significant judgment benefitting landowners, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that the period of stay granted by the courts has to be counted while computing five-year period prescribed under the Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013 for release of land.

The ruling is important as the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, says proceedings shall deemed to have lapsed if the award is passed more than five years ago, but possession of the land has not been taken or compensation has not been paid.

It now means that the stay period will be taken into consideration. In case of inability of the state to take possession of land due to stay by the courts for five years or more, the proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed.

The matter was placed before the High Court Bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta, GS Sandhawalia and Kuldeep Singh. Justices Hemant Gupta and GS Sandhawalia ruled: "We hold that irrespective of any interim orders passed by the court, the proceedings shall stand lapsed". Justice Kuldeep Singh, however, gave a dissenting note on certain issues.

The Bench was assisted by a battery of lawyers, including ML Sarin, Mohan Jain, Hemant Sarin, Nitin Sarin, Shailendra Jain, RS Rai, Puneet Bali, Fateh Saini and Dr Ashwani Kumar. The vital question of law before the Bench was whether the period of stay granted by the courts is to be excluded while computing five-year period prescribed under the Act.

Appearing on behalf of landowners and farmers, Mohan Jain said the state government was handing  land to private builders after acquiring it from farmers and land owners. He argued most of the acquired land had been given by the government to private builders. He said the purpose of the right to fair compensation could be defeated if the period of stay is excluded while counting five-year period.

 Article referred: http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation/court-stay-to-be-counted-in-land-acquisition-cases-hc/22313.html

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more