/2023 INSC 0169/
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 3828 OF 2017
MOHINDER SINGH(DEAD) THROUGH LRS
AND ANOTHER  ….APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
NARAIN SINGH AND OTHERS ….RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
Rastogi, J.
1. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order
dated   22 nd
  November,   2012   passed   by   the   Division   Bench   of   the
High Court of Delhi holding that once the rural area is urbanized by
issuance   of   a   notification   under   Section   507(a)   of   the   Delhi
Municipal Corporation Act, 1957(hereinafter being referred to as the
“Act 1957”), it ceases to be governed by the provisions of the Delhi
Land   Reforms   Act,   1954(hereinafter   being   referred   to   as   the   “Act
1954”)   in   sequel   thereto   and   held   that   the   proceedings   under   Act,
1

1954   were   non   est   leaving   the   parties   to   agitate   their
claims/disputes   before   appropriate   fora   clarifying   that   all   pleas   in
law   shall   remain   available   to   the   parties   before   the   appropriate
forum. 
2. The facts in seriatim as manifest from the record are that one
Maman   Singh   who   was   a   recorded   Bhumidhar   of   the   land
admeasuring 4 Bighas 18 Biswas in Khasra No. 6/19/2 M in village
Samepur,   Delhi   as   alleged,   sold   the   land   to   one   Bhai   Ram   vide
registered   sale   deed   dated   9 th
  March,   1970.     The   respondents
Narain   Singh   and   Som   Dutt   have   purchased   2   Bighas   18   Biswas
and   2   Bighas   respectively   from   Shri   Maman   Singh   by   a   registered
sale   deed   dated   4 th
  May,   1989.     Later,   they   applied   for   mutation
under Act, 1954 and their names were mutated on 31 st
 May, 1989.
3. It   has   been   pleaded   by   the   appellants   that   before   the
registered   sale   deed   dated   4 th
  May,   1989   came   to   be   executed   by
Maman Singh in favour of the respondents herein and their names
were   mutated   on   31 st
  May,   1989,   the   appellants   had   come   into
possession   over   the   subject   land.     The   appellants   later   challenged
the   mutation   order   dated   31 st
  May,   1989   opened   in   favour   of   the
2

respondents   claiming   adverse   possession   by   filing   appeal   under
Section   64   of   the   Act   1954.     After   certain   rounds   of   litigation,   the
Financial   Commissioner   set   aside   the   order   of   mutation   passed   in
favour   of   the   respondents   by   Order   dated   10 th
  February,   1995
holding  that  the transfer  was in contravention  of Section  33 of  the
Act,   1954   and   further   ordered   the   land   in   dispute   to   be   vested   in
Gaon Sabha.
4. It   is   relevant   to   mention   that   the   Order   of   the   Financial
Commissioner   dated   10 th
  February,   1995   wherein   it   was   observed
“land   in   dispute   ordered   to   be   vested   in   Gaon   Sabha”   was   never
challenged   by   the   appellants   whereas   the   respondents   challenged
the Order dated 10 th
 February, 1995 by filing Writ Petition(civil) No.
670 of 1995 before the learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court
which came to be dismissed by judgment dated 14 th
 July, 2008 and
that   became   the   subject   matter   of   challenge   at   the  instance   of   the
respondents assailing in LPA No. 591 of 2008.
5. The Division  Bench  of  the High  Court  returned a finding  that
once   the   notification   dated   23 rd
  April,   1982   has   been   published   in
exercise   of   power   under   Section   507(a)   of   the   Act,   1957   which
3

expressly urbanizes the subject land in question and brings within
the   scope   and   ambit   of   Act,   1957,   it   no   more   remains   rural   area
thus, all proceedings under the Act, 1954 stand   non est  leaving the
parties to agitate their claims/disputes before appropriate fora with
a clarification that all the pleas in law shall remain available to the
parties   before   the   appropriate   fora   which   may   be   adopted   for
redressal   of   grievance   under   judgment   impugned   dated   22 nd
November,   2012   which   is   a   subject   matter   of   challenge   in   appeal
before us.
6. In   this   context,   it   may   be   noticed   that   respondents   Narain
Singh and Som Dutt had filed a Civil Suit for mandatory injunction
along with an application under Order XXXIX Rule 1 & 2 of Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 for grant of temporary injunction.  The matter
at   the   stage   of   temporary   jurisdiction   travelled   to   this   Court   in   a
special leave petition filed at the instance of respondents which was
dismissed by Order dated 23 rd
 January, 1992 with a direction to the
revenue   authorities   to   decide   the   matter   in   four   months.
Subsequently,   by   order   dated   2 nd
  September,   1992,   this   Court
directed   the   concerned   SHO   to   hand   over   possession   to   the
4

appellants   herein   and   pursuant   to   Order   of   this   Court,   the
appellants are in possession of the subject land in question.
7. The main thrust of submission of Mr. Rakesh Dwivedi, learned
senior   counsel   for   the   appellants   is   that   apart   from   the   order
passed   by   this   Court   dated   2 nd
  September,   1992   to   hand   over
possession   of   the   subject   land   to   the   appellants,   it   can   further   be
supported  from   the   notice   issued  under   Section   81  by   SDM  to   the
present   appellants   dated   18 th
  January,   1984   which   indicates   that
the appellants are in possession.
8. Learned counsel further submits that once Maman Singh had
sold   the  land  by   registered  sale   deed  in   favour   of   Bhai  Ram   on  9 th
March,   1970   and   handed   over   possession   thereof,   he   (Maman
Singh) had no right, title and interest to execute the successive sale
deed and he could not hand over  possession to the respondents of
the   subject   land.     That   apart,   the   possession   handed   over   to   the
appellants has been upheld.
9. Learned counsel further submits that after taking holistic view
of   the   Act,   1954   and   of   Act   1957,   even   after   declaration   of
urbanization by issuance of notification under Section 507(a) of the
5

Act 1957, it will not cease the right of the parties   inter se   conferred
under provisions of the Act 1954.   There is no provision under the
Act,   1957   which   may   suggest   issuance   of   the   notification   of
urbanizing under Section 507(a) of the Act ceases automatically the
provisions   of   the   Act   1954.     That   apart,   Section   150(3)   of   the   Act,
1954 specifically provides for the consequences when whole of Gaon
Sabha cease to be a rural area by virtue of Section 507 of the Act,
1957.     The   consequence   of   dissolution   of   Gaon   Sabha   and   sub­
clause   (e)   of   Section   150(3)   specifically   says   that   the   provisions   of
this Act, 1954 shall apply.
10. Learned   counsel   submits   that   the   Act,   1954   is   one   such   law
which  is  a  special  Act  relating   to  land  reforms  by  virtue  of  Section
1(2)   which   extends   to   the   whole   of   the   UT   of   Delhi.     The   area
covered   under   Act,   1957   is   not   so   excluded.     It   creates   rights   of
tenure   holders   and   Bhumidhar   within   the   ambit   of   Section   5   and
such   rights   can   be   acquired   in   various   ways.     Under   Chapter   III,
Section C relates to user of land and Section D pertains to transfer
of   land   by   Bhumidhar   and   Section   E   pertains   to   devolution   and
6

Section   F   pertains   to   partition.     Thus,   Act,   1954   is   a   special   code
pertaining to the rights of Bhumidhar and other tenure holders.
11. Learned  counsel  further   submits  that   so  far  as  the  Act,  1957
is   concerned,   it   is   the   Act   which   deals   with   Delhi   Municipal
Corporation.     There   is   nothing   in   the   Act,   1957   to   suggest   that   it
purports   to   regulate   the   tenure   of   Bhumidhar   in   the   UT   of   Delhi
after the urbanization of area is notified.   Since the purport of Act,
1957   is   not   to   govern   the   holding   of   the   tenure,   it   has   been
specifically   provided   by   Section   502   that   other   laws   are   not   to   be
disregarded for the time being in force.  
12. In   substance,   learned   counsel   submits   that   Act,   1954
continues to operate even after urbanization under Section 507(a) of
the Act, 1957 and further submits that the finding returned by the
Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned judgment is not
legally sustainable and deserves to be interfered with by this Court.
In   support   of   his   submission,   learned   counsel   has   placed   reliance
on   the   judgment   of   this   Court   in   Om   Prakash   Agarwal   and
Others  Vs.  Batara Behera and Others 1
.
1   1999(3) SCC 231
7

13. Learned   counsel   further   submits   that   the   Division   Bench   of
the High Court has not taken note of the earlier view expressed by
the Division Bench of the High Court in   Umed Singh   Vs.   Govt.  of
NCT   of   Delhi   and   Others 2
  and   that   the   earlier   Division   Bench   of
the   High   Court   also   considered   the   scheme   of   Act,   1957   and   Act,
1954   and   has   returned   a   finding   that   on   issuance   of   notification
under Section 507(a) of the Act 1957, it may not cease the rights of
the   parties   inter   se   existing   under   the   Act,   1954   and,   in   the   given
circumstances, judgment needs to be interfered with by this Court.
14. Per   contra,   Mr.   Vikas   Singh,   learned   senior   counsel   for   the
respondents, submits that the respondents  Narain  Singh  and  Som
Dutt purchased 2 Bighas 18 Biswas and 2 Bighas respectively from
the   Bhumidhar   Maman   Singh   by   a   registered   sale   deed   dated   4 th
May,   1989.     So   far   as   the   right,   title   and   interest   on   the   subject
property  is   concerned,   it  vested  in   favour   of   the  respondents.     The
registered sale deed dated 4 th
 May, 1989 has never been questioned
by   Bhai   Ram   who   could   be  said   to  be   the   person   aggrieved   by   the
subsequent sale transaction as has been alleged by the appellants.
2   1997 SCCOnline Del 842
8

Even the right claimed by the appellants of adverse possession is a
weak right and not legally sustainable.  In this regard, the civil suit
which   has   been   filed   at   their   instance   is   practically   a   non­starter
because of pendency of the present appeal still the appellants have
no right, title and interest over the subject property in question.
15. Learned counsel further submits that looking to the scheme of
the   Act,   1954   and   of   Act,   1957,   while   harmonizing,   both   are
governed   in   different   fields   and   once   the   notification   has   been
published under Section 507(a) declaring the land to be urbanized,
which in the instant case is not disputed, the mutation proceedings
pending   under   the   Act,   1954   stand   ceased   as   the   land   does   not
exist to be rural area and, thus, no error has been committed by the
Division   Bench   of   the   High   Court   in   returning   a   finding   that   all
mutation   proceedings   stand   ceased   after   the   publication   of   the
notification under Section 507(a) of the Act, 1957.
16. Learned   counsel   further   submits   that   this   is   the   consistent
view   of   the   Delhi   High   Court   and   apart   from   the   judgment
impugned,   this   very   question   and   effect   of   issuance   of   the
notification   under   Section   507(a)   of   the   Act,   1957   was   earlier
9

examined   by   the   High   Court   in   Smt.   Indu   Khorana   Vs.   Gram
Sabha   and   Others 3
  which   was   decided   on   26 th
  March,   2010   and
after examining the scheme of Act, 1954 and Act, 1957, it was held
that once the rural area is declared to be urbanized by issuance of
notification under Section 507(a) of the Act, 1957, provisions of the
Act, 1954 cease to apply.
17. Learned   counsel   further   submits   that   after   the   matter   being
examined by the Division Bench of the High Court by two different
Benches, this being consistently followed in the later judgments by
the   High   Court   of   Delhi   and   unless   this   Court   comes   to   the
conclusion that interpretation as exposed of the Act, 1954 and Act,
1957   are   completely   perverse   and   unsustainable,   ordinarily   may
not be interfered with by this Court.
18. Learned   counsel   further   submits   that   so   far   as   the   present
respondents are concerned, despite holding  right, title and interest
in the subject land in question, pursuant to the registered sale deed
dated 4 th
 May, 1989, and their name being mutated at one stage on
31 st
 May, 1989, in the given circumstances, at least appellants have
no   legal   right   to   hold   possession   of   the   subject   land   although   the
3  2010 SCCOnline DEL 1334
10

suit has been filed at the instance of the respondents and submits
that this Court may consider to restore possession in favour of the
respondents   to   avoid   multiplicity   of   litigation   in   the   interest   of
justice.
19. We  have  heard   learned   counsel   for   the   parties   and  with   their
assistance perused the material available on record.
20. The  factual  matrix  which   has  come  on  record  is  not   disputed
between   the   parties.     The   question   of   law   that   raised   for
consideration is that once the rural area is urbanized by issuance of
notification   under   the   Act   1957,   what   will   be   the   effect   to   the
provisions of the Act, 1954 in sequel thereto.
21. We   would   like   to   take   a   bird’s   eye   view   of   the   relevant
provision   of   the   Acts   to   examine   the   question   raised   for   our
consideration.
22. The Act, 1954 was enacted with an object to create a uniform
body   of   peasant   proprietors   without   intermediaries,   for   the
unification   of   the   tenancy   laws   in   force   in   Delhi   and   to   make
provisions for other matters connected therewith.
11

23. Section   1(2)   of   the   Act,   1954   extends   to   the   whole   Union
Territory   of   Delhi,   but   shall   not   apply   to   the   areas   notified   in
Section 1(2)(a) of the Act, 1954, i.e. such an area which are or may
before the first day of November, 1956 be included in a Municipality
or a notified area under the relevant Acts.
24. It may be apposite to take note of the relevant provisions of the
Act before we appreciate the effect and ambit of Act, 1954 which are
as follows:­
“1. (I) This Act may be called the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954.
 
 (2) It extends to the whole of the Union territory of Delhi, but shall
not apply to­ 
(a) the   areas   which   are   or   may   before   the   first   day
of   November,  1956   be   included   in  a   Municipality   or   a
Notified   Area   under   the   provisions   of   the   Punjab
Municipal   Act   1911,   or   a   Cantonment   under   the
provisions of the Cantonments Act, 1924,
3. Definitions. ­ In this Act, unless the Context otherwise requires­ 
(1) to (4)…..
''(5)   "Delhi   town"   means   the   areas   which   immediately   before   the
establishment of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi were included
in the limits of Delhi Municipality, Civil Station Notified Area, West
Delhi Municipality and the Fort Notified Area; 
(6) to (12)….
(l3)   "land"   except   in   sections   23   and   24,   means   land   held   or
occupied   for   purpose   connected   with   agriculture,   horticulture   or
12

animal  husbandry   including   pisciculture  and poultry  farming  and
includes­ 
(a) buildings appurtenant thereto, 
(b) village abadis, 
(c) grovelands, 
(d)   lands   for   village   pasture   or   land   covered   by   water
and   used   for   growing   singharas   and   other   produce   or
land   in   the   bed   of   a   river   and   used   for   casual   or
occasional cultivation, 
but does not include ­
land   occupied   by   buildings   in   belts   of   areas   adjacent
to Dehi town, which the Chief Commissioner may by a
notification   in   the   Official   Gazette   declare   as   an
acquisition thereto;
150. (1) & (2)…. 
(3) If the whole of a  Gaon Sabha  area ceases to be included in rural
areas as defined in the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, by
virtue   of   a   notification   under   section   507   of   that   Act,   the   Gaon
Sabha   constituted   for   that   area   shall   thereupon   stand   dissolved
and on such dissolution,­ 
(a)   all   properties,   movable   and   immovable,   and   all
interests   of   whatsoever   nature   and   kind   therein
including   moneys   held   in   Gaon   Sabha   Area   Fund,
vested   in   the   Gaon   Sabha   immediately   before   such
dissolution,   shall,   with   all   rights   of   whatsoever
description,   used,   enjoyed   or   possessed   by   Gaon
Sabha , vest in the Central Government; 
(b)   all   duties,   obligations   and   liabilities   incurred,   all
contracts   entered   into   and   all   matters   and   things
engaged   to   be   done   by,   with   or   for   the   Gaon   Sabha
before   such   dissolution   shall   be   deemed   to  have   been
incurred,   entered   into   or   engaged   to   be   done   with   or
for the Central Government; 
(c) all rates, taxes, fees, rents and other charges due to
the   Gaon   Sabha   immediately   before   such   dissolution
shall be deemed to be due to the Central Government; 
13

(d)   all   suits,   prosecutions   and   other   legal   proceedings
instituted   or   which   might   have   been   instituted   by   or
against   the   Gaon   Sabha   may   be   continued   or
instituted by or against the Union of India; 
(e)   the   provisions   of   this   Act   shall  apply   in   relation   to
lands in such  Gaon Sabha  area, not being lands vested
in   the   Central   Government   clause   (a),   subject   to   the
modification   that   references   therein   to   Gaon   Sabha
and  Gaon  Panchayat  shall  be  construed  as  references
to the Central Government; 
(f) notwithstanding anything contained in clause (b) of
sub­section   (2)  of   section   1,  the   provisions  of  sections
84, 85, 86A and 87 and any other provision of this Act
relating to ejectment of persons shall apply in relation
to   lands   vested   in   the   Central   Government   under
clause   (a)   subject   to   the   modification   that   references
therein   to   Gaon   Sabha   and   Gaon   Panchayat   shall   be
construed as references to the Central Government.
(4) If only a portion of a   Gaon Sabha   area ceases to be included in
rural   areas   as   aforesaid   the   jurisdiction   of   the   Gaon   Sabha
constituted for that area shall cease in respect of that portion and
upon  such cesser, the provisions of  clause (a)  to (f)  of sub­section
(3)   shall   apply   to   that   portion   as   if   the   Gaon   Sabha   had   been
constituted   for   that   portion   alone   and   dissolved,   subject   to   such
incidental   and   consequential   orders   as   the   Chief   Commissioner
may deem necessary to make. 
(5)   If   the   size   of   a   Gaon   Sabha   Area   is   reduced   as   a   result   of   a
portion   thereof   ceasing   to   be   included   in   rural   areas   as   aforesaid
and   the   Chief   Commissioner   is   of   the   opinion   that   the   size   of   the
Gaon   Sabha   area   is   not   sufficiently   large   to   be   under   the
jurisdiction   of   a   separate   Gaon   Sabha,   he   may,   by   notification   in
the Official Gazette, declare that such  Gaon Sabha  area shall, from
a   date   to   be   specified   in   the   notification,   cease   to   be   a   separate
Gaon   Sabha   area   and   the   Gaon   Sabha   constituted   there   for   shall
stand dissolved and may direct that the said area shall be included
in   one   or   more   adjoining   Gaon   Sabha   areas,   and   thereupon   the
provisions of section 3 of the Delhi Panchayat Raj Act, 1954 (Delhi
Act 3 of 1955), shall, so far as may be, apply.”
14

25. The   combined   reading   of   the   relevant   provisions   referred   to
hereinabove clearly indicates that the Act, 1954 will not cover such
area   as   defined   in   the   first   instance   which   may   or   before   the   first
day   of   November,   1956   be   included   in   a   Municipality.     The   ‘land’
which has been defined under Section 3(13) provides that except in
sections  23 and  24,  such  of  the land held  or  occupied for  purpose
connected   with   agriculture,   horticulture   or   animal   husbandry
including   pisciculture   and   poultry   farming   and   further   includes
other categories which are part of land but at the same time, it does
not include land occupied by building in belts or areas adjacent to
Delhi town.
26. ‘Delhi   town’   has   been   defined   under   Section   3(5)   of   the   Act
which   clearly   defines   that   areas   which   immediately   before   the
establishment  of  the   Municipal  Corporation  of  Delhi  were included
in   the   limits   of   Delhi   Municipality.     There   is   complete   exclusion   of
the   land   occupied   by   buildings   adjacent   to   Delhi   town   which   falls
before   the   establishment   of   Municipal   Corporation   of   Delhi   and   is
not a land covered for the purpose by deciding rights of the parties
under tenure holder under Chapter II of the Act, 1954.
15

27. At the same time, Section 150(3), (4) and (5) of the Act indicate
that if the Gaon Sabha area ceases to be included in rural areas as
defined in the Act, 1957 by virtue of notification under Section 507
of the Act, the Gaon Sabha shall thereupon stand dissolved or if a
portion of Gaon Sabha area ceases to be included in rural areas as
aforesaid, the jurisdiction of the Gaon Sabha for that area ceases in
respect   of   that   portion   and   for   that   portion   stands   dissolved   or   to
that extent, the size of the Gaon Sabha stands reduced as a result
of a portion ceasing to be included in rural area as aforesaid. 
28. Let   us   take   a   view   of   relevant   provisions   of   Act,   1957   for   the
present purpose which are as under:­
“2(52)   "rural   areas"   means   the   areas   of   Delhi   which   immediately
before   the   establishment   of   a   Corporation   are   situated   within   the
local   limits   of   the   District   Board   of   Delhi   established   under   the
Punjab   District   Boards   Act,   1883   (Punjab   Act   20   of   1883),   but
shall   not   include   such   portion   thereof   as   may,   by   virtue   of   a
notification   under   section   507,   cease   to   be   included   in   the   rural
areas as herein defined;
2(61)   "urban   areas"   means   the   areas   of   Delhi   which   are   not   rural
areas;
502.   Other   laws   not   to   be   disregarded—   Save   as   provided   in   this
Act,   nothing   contained   in   this   Act   shall   be   construed   as
authorising   the   disregard   by   a   Corporation   or   any   municipal
authority   or   any   municipal   officer   or   other   municipal   employee   of
any law for the time being in force.
16

507.   Special   provisions   as   to   rural   areas.—   Notwithstanding
anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this Act,— 
(a)   a   Corporation   with   the   previous   approval   of   the
Government,   may,   by   notification   in   the   Official   Gazette,
declare that any portion of the rural areas shall cease to be
included   therein   and   upon   the   issue   of   such   notification
that   portion   shall   be   included   in   and   form   part   of   the
urban areas; 
(b)   a   Corporation   with   the   previous   approval   of   the
Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette,— 
(i) exempt   the   rural   areas   or   any   portion   thereof   from
such of the provisions of this Act as it deems fit, 
(ii) levy taxes, rates, fees and other charges in the rural
areas   or   any   portion   thereof   at   rates   lower   than
those   at   which   such   taxes,   rates,   fees   and   other
charges   are   levied   in   the   urban   areas   or   exempt
such areas or portion from any such tax, rate, fee or
other charge.”
(c)   a Corporation shall pay a Gaon Sabha­
(i) an   amount   equal   to   the   proceeds   of   the   tax   on
profession,   trades,   callings   and   employments,   as
and   when   that   tax   is   levied   in   the   Gaon   Sabha
area, and
(ii) an amount equal to such portion of the proceeds
of the property taxes on lands and buildings in that
area   as  may   from   time   to   time   be   determined   by   a
Corporation,   after   deducting   the   cost   of   collection
from such proceeds.
29. The   Act,   1957   has   been   primarily   enacted   to   have   a   uniform
body   to   administer   the   Delhi   Municipal   Corporation   to   consolidate
various bodies, local authorities, looking after the municipal affairs
and   to   centralise   for   better   administration   and   to   overcome   the
17

problems   being   faced   by   various   authorities   as   well   as   by   the
public. 
30. Section 2(52) defines the ‘rural areas’ which demonstrates that
the   area   of   Delhi   which   immediately   before   the   establishment   of   a
Corporation,   falls   within   the   local   limits   of   the   District   Board   of
Delhi, be considered to be the rural area but that shall not include
such   portion   thereof   which   by   virtue   of   notification   under   Section
507 declared to be urbanized and it ceases to be included under the
term   ‘rural   areas’   and   Section   2(61)   defines   ‘urban   areas’   as   the
areas of Delhi which are not rural areas.  
31. To simplify it further, once there is a notification issued by the
competent   authority   in   exercise   of   power   under   Section   507(a)
which is a special provision in reference to rural areas, such of the
rural   areas   cease   to   be   included   therein   upon   issuance   of   the
notification   and   shall   thereafter   include   in   and   form   part   of   the
urban areas in terms of the notification.   Sub­clause (b) and (c ) of
Section   507   deals   with   the   nature   of   grant   of   exemption   or   levy   of
taxes for such of the areas falling within the scope and ambit of the
Act, 1957.  
18

32. At   the   same   time,   Section   502   on   which   the   learned   counsel
for   the   appellants   has   given   more   emphasis,   it   only   provides   that
this   Act(Act   1957)   shall   not   be   construed   authorizing   disregard   to
any   law   for   the   time   being   in   force   and   rightly   so   for   the   reason,
that   scope   and   ambit   of   the   Act,   1954,   in   no   manner,   has   to   be
disregarded by the provisions of the Act, 1957.
33. At   this   stage,   if   we   look   into   the   Delhi   Development   Act,
1957(hereinafter   being   referred   to   as   the   “DDA   Act”),   it   nowhere
makes   a   distinction   in   the   nature   of   land   whether   it   is   rural   or
urban, as the case may be.   The DDA Act, 1957 is enacted with an
object of development of Delhi according to sanctioned plan and for
matters ancillary thereto.   If we consider the term ‘development’ as
defined   under   Section   2(e)   of   the   DDA   Act,   it   clearly   notifies   that
such of the area which has been declared to be a development area
under   Section   12,   after   publication   in   the   official   gazette,   shall   be
considered a development area within the purport of the Act and it
is a complete code in itself for the purpose of disposal of land.  The
expression   ‘land’   in   Section   2(l)   is   in   reference   to   the   Land
Acquisition Act, 1894.
19

34. Relevant Sections of Act, 1957 are reproduced hereunder:­
“2(e)   “development   area”   means   any   area   declared   to   be   a
development area under sub­section (1) of section 12;
2(l) the expression “land” shall have the meaning assigned to it in
section 3 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
12.   Declaration   of   development   areas   and   development   of   land   in
those and other areas.—
(1)   As   soon   as   may   be   after   the   commencement   of   this   Act,   the
Central   Government   may,   by   notification   in   the   Official   Gazette,
declare   any   area   in   Delhi   to   be   a   development   area   for   the
purposes of this Act:
 
Provided   that   no   such   declaration   shall   be   made   unless   a
proposal   for   such   declaration   has   been   referred   by   the   Central
Government   to   the   Authority   and   the   Municipal   Corporation   of
Delhi for expressing their views thereon within thirty days from the
date of the receipt of the reference or within such further period as
the   Central   Government   may   allow   and   the   period   so   specified   or
allowed has expired.
(2)   Save  as  otherwise   provided   in  this   Act,   the   Authority   shall  not
undertake or carry out any development of land in any area which
is not a development area. 
(3)   After   the   commencement   of   this   Act   no   development   of   land
shall   be   undertaken   or   carried   out   in   any   area   by   any   person   or
body (including a department of Government) unless,— 
(i) where   that  area   is   a   development   area,   permission   for   such
development has been obtained in writing from the Authority
in accordance with the provisions of this Act;
 
(ii) where   that   area   is   an   area   other   than   a   development   area,
approval   of,   or   sanction   for,   such   development   has   been
obtained in writing from the local authority concerned or any
officer   or   authority   thereof   empowered   or   authorised   in   this
behalf,  in  accordance  with the  provisions  made  by   or  under
the   law   governing   such   authority   or   until   such   provisions
have   been   made,   in   accordance   with   the   provisions   of   the
regulations   relating   to   the   grant   of   permission   for
20

development   made   under   the   Delhi   (Control   of   Building
Operations) Act, 1955 (53 of 1955), and in force immediately
before the commencement of this Act: 
Provided   that   the   local   authority   concerned   may
[subject   to   the   provisions   of   section   53A]   amend   those
regulations in their application to such area. 
(4) After the coming into operation of any of the plans in any area
no   development   shall   be   undertaken   or   carried   out   in   that   area
unless such development is also in accordance with such plans. 
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub­sections (3) and (4)
development of any land begun by any department of Government
or any local authority before the commencement of this Act may be
completed   by   that   department   or   local   authority   without
compliance with the requirements of those sub­sections.”
35. So far as the DDA Act is concerned, it is only for the purpose
of   development   of   Delhi   according   to   the   sanctioned   master   plan
and zonal development plan notified under Section 7 of the Act and
for matters ancillary thereto regardless of fact whether it is a rural
area   or   urbanized   which   is   for   different   purposes   covered   by   the
provisions of the Act, 1954 and Act 1957.
36. After   harmonizing   the   provisions   of   the   Act,   1954   and   Act
1957,   we   are   of   the   considered   view   that   once   a   notification   has
been published in exercise of power under Section 507(a) of the Act,
1957,   the   provisions   of   the   Act,   1954   cease   to   apply.     In   sequel
21

thereto,  the   proceedings  pending   under   the   Act,   1954   become   non
est  and loses its legal significance.
37. We   approve   the   view   expressed   by   the   Division   Bench   of   the
High Court in   Smt. Indu   Khorana (supra) which was later followed
in the judgment impugned by the Division Bench of the High Court
dated 22 nd
 November, 2012.
38. So far as the judgment of this Court in  Om Prakash Agarwal
&   Others (supra)   on   which   learned   counsel   for   the   appellants   has
placed   reliance   is   concerned,   in   the   first   instance,   there   was   no
such notification under the relevant laws which declared the land to
be urbanized as published in the instant case under Section 507(a)
of   the   Act,   1957   and   the   objection   raised   by   the   learned   counsel
was in reference to the scope and ambit of the Orissa Land Reforms
Act,   1960   and   the   question   was   whether   the   reforms   Act   has   any
application to the land which is a part of the master plan of the city
under the provisions of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960.  In that
reference,   the   observations   were   made   by   this   Court   as   to   what
extent   the   provisions   of   the   reforms   Act   will   apply   in   reference   to
agricultural or other purposes.  This Court was very conscious that
22

no   notification   had   been   published   in   the   case   on   hand   which
reserved   for   urbanization   within   the   scope   and   ambit   of   Section
73(c) of the Orrisa Land Reforms Act, 1960 which, in our view, may
not be of any assistance to the appellants.
39. So   far   as   the   submission   made   in   reference   to   the   earlier
judgment   of   the   Division   Bench   of   the   High   Court   of   Delhi   which
has not been looked into by the Division Bench under the impugned
judgment   in   the   case   of   Umed   Singh (supra)   is   concerned,   on
principle,   we   are   not   in   agreement   with   the   view   expressed   by   the
High Court in  Umed Singh (supra), at the same time, we would like
to   observe   that   the   case   was   in   reference   to   consolidation
notification   issued   on   8 th
  September,   1993,   and   what   will   be   the
effect  of   Consolidation  and  Prevention  of   Fragmentation  Act,  1948,
in that reference, the High Court examined the scope and ambit of
the Act, 1957.
40. Before   we   conclude,   we   may   like   to   observe   that   the
respondents   purchased   the   subject   land   from   Maman   Singh
(recorded Bhumidhar) by a registered sale deed dated 4 th
 May, 1989
and mutation also, at one time, was opened in their names on 31 st
23

May, 1989.  Later, they were compelled to file a civil suit in the year
1990 for taking over possession of the subject property in question.
41. It reveals from the record that after a few rounds of litigation,
the   Financial   Commissioner   set   aside   the   order   of   mutation   by
Order   dated   10 th
  February,   1995,   the   matter   later   travelled   to   the
Division   Bench   of   the   High   Court   of   Delhi   and   by   judgment   dated
22 nd
  November,   2012,   it   was   held   that   once   the   rural   area   is
urbanized   by   issuance   of   notification   under   Section   507(a)   of   the
Act, 1957, it ceases to be governed by the provisions of Act, 1954.
42.   What   persuaded   this   Court   is   that   even   after   upholding   the
judgment   of   the   Division   Bench   of   the   High   Court   dated   22 nd
November, 2012, it gives a fresh life to the respondents to go ahead
in   taking   possession   of   the   subject   property   despite   the   fact   that
registered   sale   deed   dated   4 th
  May,   1989   was   executed   in   their
favour   by   Maman   Singh(Bhumidhar)   but   they   are   still   deprived   of
possession and the defence of the appellants in counter is that they
are in possession of the subject land by adverse possession.  At the
same time, this Court may also record that the registered sale deed
dated   4 th
  May,   1989   executed   in   favour   of   the   respondents   by
24

Maman   Singh   (Bhumidhar)   was   never   the   subject   matter   of
challenge and no such proceedings are pending in the Court of law.
43.   At   this   point   of   time,   it   reminds   us   that   the   civil   suit   filed   at
the instance of the respondents for taking possession of the subject
land   which   is   pending   for   the   last   32   years   has   not   started   its
journey as yet and this is called the travesty of injustice to a person
who   is   indisputedly   the   title   holder   still   unable   to   enjoy   the
property.
44.   In the given facts and circumstances, in exercise of our power
under Article 142 of the Constitution and to do complete justice to
the   parties,   we   direct   the   appellants   to   hand   over   physical
possession   of   the   subject   land   free   from   all   encumbrances   to   the
respondents within a period of two months from the date of passing
of this Order.   If the appellants fail to hand over possession within
the   time   stipulated,   it   will   be   open   to   the   respondents   to   make   an
application   to   the   concerned   jurisdictional   Judicial   Magistrate   and
after   obtaining   necessary   orders   with   assistance   of   the   local
administration   may   proceed   for   taking   possession   of   the   subject
land.   It goes without saying that the possession has to be handed
25

over in terms of the registered sale deed dated 4 th
  May, 1989 which
has   been   executed   by   Maman   Singh   (Bhumidhar)   in   the   names   of
the respective respondents.
45. The pending civil suit in the above terms stands disposed of.
46. We   find   no   substance   in   the   instant   appeal.     The   same   is
hereby dismissed with the observations afore­stated.  No costs.     
47. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
………………………J.
(AJAY RASTOGI)
       ……………………….J.
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR)
       ……………………….J.
(BELA M. TRIVEDI)
NEW DELH;
MARCH 14, 2023
26