Appeal
No. 25/ 07
Vedpal
v/s Gaon Sabha Ghitomi
IN
THE COURT OF DY. COMMISSIONER & COLLECTOR
DISTRICT SOUTH WEST,
KAPASHERA, DELHI
Vedpal
................................................. Appellant
Vs.
Gaon Sabha
Ghitorni .................................................. Respondent
JUDGEMENT
This
shall dispose of the appeal dated 07/02/2007 filed by the appellant
hereinabove u/s 185 of the DLR
Act, 1954 against the order dated 12/01/2007 of the SDM/RA (Vasant
Vihar) in Case No. 218/RA/1996 issued u/s 85 & 86A of the DLR
Act, 1954. Vide the said order the SDM/RA has dismissed the suit of
the appellants (herein above) in respect of suit land bearing Khasra
No. 629/2 (5-10) of village Ghitomi and ejected them from the suit
land. Aggrieved by the said order appellant has preferred an appeal
before this court.
Matter
was heard at length and kept for orders on 07.09.2012. After hearing
the appellant and perusing the material on record it is seen that the
appellant hereinabove has been encroaching upon the suit land which
is a Govt. land since long time. The only plea taken by the appellant
is that he is in the possession on Govt. land for long time and
therefore he should be declared Bhumidar u/s 85 of the DLR Act. 1954
on the basis of adverse possession. Further, it is argued that the
proceedings u/s 86A of DLR Act, 1954 is barred by limitation. In this
regard it is observed that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter
Hermaji Waghaji Jat v/s Bhikhabhai Khengarbhai Harijan & Others
(AIR 2009 SC 103) has held that-
"The
law of adverse possession which ousts an owner on the basis of
inaction within limitation is irrational, illogical and wholly
disproportionate. The law as it exists is extremely harsh for the
true owner and a windfall for a dishonest person who had illegally
taken possession of the property of the true owner. The law ought not
to benefit a person who in a clandestine manner takes possession of
the property of the owner in contravention of law. This in substance
would mean that the law gives
seal
of approval to the illegal action or activities of a rank trespasser
or who had wrongfully taken possession of the property of the true
owner. "Further
the Apex Court has gone on to emphasize as to "why
the law should place premium on dishonesty by legitimizing possession
of a rank trespasser and compelling the owner to lose its possession
only because of his inaction in taking back the possession within
limitation.”
In
view of the above, I am of the considered opinion that the appeal of
the appellant hereinabove lacks merit. Further as per the order of
the Hon. Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh & Ors Vs. State of
Punjab and Ors in Civil Appeal No. 1132/2011 and SLP (c) No.
3109/2011 the encroachers and illegal occupants on the Gram Sabha
land needs to be evicted and the Gram Sabha land needs to be
retrieved and restored to the Gram Sabha. Hence the order:
ORDER
In
view of the observations made in the judgement, the appeal dated
07/02/2007 filed by the appellant hereinabove u/s 185 of the DLR
Act, 1954 against the order dated 12/01/2007 of the SDM/RA (Vasant
Vihar) in Case No. 218/RA/1996 issued under section 85 & 86A of
the DLR Act, 1954 is hereby dismissed. The SDM/RA, Vasant Vihar and
BDO, South West to take further necessary action in time bound manner
for taking
possession of the suit land.
Given
under my hand and seal
of this court on this 10th
day of October 2012.
Vikas
Anand, IAS
Dy.
Commissioner & Collector
Copy
to:
- SDM, Vasant Vihar
- BDO. South West
- Both the parties
No comments:
Post a Comment