Land acquisition act 1894

Hello,

It is an encroachment on your land. You can pray from removing encroachment to the court. 

HI Sir,

Does the limitation act applies here? 

Any landmark judgements I can rely on for similar cases?

Go through the case of Samruddhi Co Operative Housing .... vs Mumbai Mahalaxmi Construction... judgment delivered on  11 January, 2022: The Bench consists of J. [Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud]  and J. [AS Bopanna] Several judgments relevant to your case are there.

Thanks a lott, let me go through this judgement.

"he has now approached the High Court to consider this pleadings and restore back his land" - Is it a Writ Petition? What are the reliefs sought?

 

Many complexities involved when it comes to land. Where is the land located? Secondly, what was the nature of possession? Thirdly, what are the reliefs which are sought? 

Hello Sir, Yes, this is a Writ Petition filed.

Relief Sought :

1. to quash the acquistion proceedings and restore the land

Grounds

1. The land owners name is no there in priliminary or final notificaiton

2. No Award has been passed in the Land owner name.

Please share if there are any land mark judgements for similar case.

Admittedly, there has been no requisite notifications or award. How can you pray for quashing a proceedings which has never been existence. It appears that you are yet to post the material facts.

Hello Sir,

Thank you for your response, you are correct I had missed sharing one main point, let me rephrase the question as below.

Senario - There is a land "A" which is around 10Acres, the land was sold and to multiple people B,C,D,E,F as 2 acres respectively. 

A = B(2acres) + C(2acres) + D(2acres) + E(2acres) = F(2acres)

The Development authority was formed in 1979 and issued notificaitons to C,D,E,F, however B didnt receive any notificaiton neither in Preiliminary or Final Notificaiton, not any award passed in his name.

Even through the notificaiton was not issued to the Land Owner B, the portion land was taken away from B The Notification was issued in 1979 and completed in 1985 and the layout was formed. 

The BDA started disturbing the portion of the land which owner was living in, frustrated with the BDA, he had approached the High Court with the WP in 1995 and seeked to regularize the construction under Karnataka Regularization Act, the Court accepted the petition and allowed and direct the authority to consider the applciation from the land owner and regularize it.

However the petitoner has not applied any applicaiton for regularization and BDA also didnt interfere in the land owner portion of the land until 2019.

Recently they tried to interfere again, the legal hiers of the landowner has now filed another WP seeking to comply with the 1995 order, but on further discussion with the advocate they found out that the landower name (B) was missing and no notification was issued to B and no award has been passed in the name of B.

Grounds for quashing the proceedings :

1. WP 1995 
2. No Notificaiton has been passed
3. No award has been apportioned to B.

Please advice here.

What is the relevance of Karnataka Regularisation Act? The statement of objects and reasons to the corresponding Bill reads as follows:

"Act 29 of 1991.- Bangalore Development Authority and other local bodies have been finding it difficult in their task of meeting the increasing demand for residential sites due to disproportionately high number of unauthorised constructions on urban land. The unauthorised constructions which already have come up over the years cannot possibly be demolished and any wholesale demolition would not only amount to wastage of national wealth but may in some amount to wastage of national wealth but may in some cases also create law and order problems. Keeping in view the above points, it is felt necessary to have a comprehensive legislation for regularisation of certain types of un-authorised constructions. Hence this Bill."

As I could understand, the said Act is for the purpose of regularising unauthorised constructions, not for providing remedy to those who have been deprived by the Government of their property without following the due process.

Ohh I understand now sir.

So, the owner cannot claim under "regularize the construction under Karnataka Regularization Act" but he can definaltey fight on the grounds that the due process of Acquistion has not been followed by BDA 

due process includes

1. Notificaiton under Priliminary and Final Notification

2. Award to be passed.

Since the Award is not yet passed, the acquisition proceedings can be held lapsed.

Is my understanding correct sir?

Please correct me if there are any errors.

Facts posted suggest that part of the land has been taken over by the Government without following the due process (however, it remains undisclosed whether any compensation has been received or otherwise). If so, in my understading, the remedy lies in filing a civi suit after serving the requisite notice under Section 80 Civil Procedure Code.

Hello Sir,

Thanks a lott for your advice.

No, the land owner has not received any compensation. 

I will try to file a civil suit for the same.