Delhi High Court imposes cost of Rs 5 lakh on petitioner for calling DDA “land grabber”

After finding that a petitioner termed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) as a “land grabber” and abused the process of law to evade a Supreme Court order upholding land acquisition proceedings, the Delhi High Court recently imposed costs of Rs. 5 lakh on him..The order was passed by a Division Bench of Justices S Muralidhar and Sanjeev Narula in a petition challenging the land acquisition proceedings pertaining to two plots of land in the Hauz Khas area of New Delhi. The petitioner had contended that the land acquisition should be deemed to have lapsed under Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013..The acquisition proceedings commenced in July 1961 with issuance of a notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land in question was handed over by the Delhi Administration to DDA in July 1961 itself. The litigation arising out of the acquisition went to the Supreme Court, which validated the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the land in question except to the extent of 1,000 sq. yd..Meanwhile, a civil suit was also instituted by the tenants of the said property, who sought a perpetual injunction to restrain DDA from evicting or interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the premises in question. The petitioner was also impleaded as a party to the suit. Meanwhile, the said property was also transacted between the various parties through sale deeds and power of attorneys..The Trial Court partly decreed and restrained the DDA and its officials from dispossessing the present petitioner except in accordance with the due process of law. On appeal, the DDA’s claim was upheld and the Court observed that the petitioner had already been directed to be ejected from the suit premises. The petitioner then challenged this order..The High Court recorded that the petitioner did not disclose about the fate of the appeal filed by him in the Supreme Court. It observed that the case is “perhaps a classic example of abuse of the process of law.”.“The facts speak for themselves. Despite the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 5 th August 1988 upholding the validity of land acquisition proceedings, the very same property was transacted, time and again, on the basis of GPAs and SPAs. Even a sale deed was executed thereafter in the teeth of the order of the Supreme Court..…The Petitioner herein was himself a party to the suit which was partly decreed followed by an appeal which was allowed and followed by second appeal by him which stood dismissed. His SLP in the Supreme Court also stood dismissed. Despite all this, Petitioner wants this Court to declare under Section 24 (2) of the 2013 Act that the same land acquisition proceedings should be deemed to have lapsed.”.The Court remarked that the petitioner has no respect for the rule of law or for the orders of courts, and imposed a cost of Rs. 5 lakh on them..The Court further directed the Vice-Chairman, DDA to take immediate steps to recover the possession of the plots in question and to institute a formal inquiry into the registration of a sale deed in respect of the property..The petitioners were represented by Advocates Sona Babbar and Hetish Raj Singh..The Respondents were represented by Senior Advocate Rajiv Bansal with Advocate Dhanesh Relan, Kamna Singh and Parul Panthi..Read the judgment: