✦ Supreme Court of India · 02 Mar 2020

D.B. BASNETT (D) THR. LRS v. THE COLLECTOR EAST DISTRICT, GANGTOK, SIKKIM & Anr.

Civil Appeal No. 196 of 2011SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, K M JOSEPH24 min read

Case at a glance

Decided
02 Mar 2020
Bench
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, K M JOSEPH

Judgment

5.

This Court, however, would like to give some time to the respondent-State to analyse the consequences of this judgment, and, in case they so desire, to acquire the land through a proper notification under the said Act, and to take proper recourse in law so as to enable them to keep the land. This Court grants three (3) months’ time from the date of the judgment for the respondent-State to make up their mind as to what they want to do. Would they still like to retain the land by issuing a proper notification, or would they like to surrender possession of the land. In either eventuality, the question of payment for use and occupation would still arise, which will have to be determined in accordance with law. Mesne profits would be determined by a Court Commissioner, to be appointed by the trial court, as a relief in that behalf has been sought in the plaint itself. [Para 20][525- D-E] Vidya Devi v. The State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. (Judgment dated 08.01.2020 in C.A.Nos. 60-61 of 2020 decided by the Supreme Court of India) – relied on.

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Sikkim Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1977 — s. 4; Constitution of India — art. 300A; Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — s. 4(1); Land Acquisition Act — s. 4; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 80; Forty Fourth Amendment Act, 1978.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Supreme Court of India, on 02 Mar 2020. The bench was SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, K M JOSEPH.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Another 12 relationships are under human verification and not counted above.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Later judgments that treat this case

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Supreme Court of India or eCourts case status (search case no. Civil Appeal No. 196 of 2011). ← Search more judgments