Annulment of a Judgment Concerning Unused Lands and Subsequent Challenges for Judicial Courts

One of the challenging and prevalent issues in the discussion of cases concerning unused lands concerns their legal status whose use situation has changed following an original owner's objection to a decision of the Discretion Board, leading to the annulment of the legal title of secondary ownership, i.e., the government, represented by the Urban Land Organization (provincial Department of Roads and Urban Development). In such cases, on the one hand, taking into account the type of the land use and its legal deed, the occupation of the government’s occupation of the land in question is proprietary and legal, and of course mainly of a sovereign type, and on the other hand, acceptance of the owner’s objection and the retroactive effect of the issued decision, the necessity to restore the property in question to its original condition and administration of justice requires the securing of the rights of the original owner, which can be implemented by the eviction and delivery of the disputed property to the original owner, or payment of its price, or delivery of its equivalent. Meanwhile, different challenges may arise concerning adjudication and judicial decision, of which the judgment under examination is one. One of which is the judgment under examination. Upon making a decision to change the land use from unused land to a land that is currently and continuously exploited or a land that has a history of farming or construction and the retroactive effect of such a decision, the basis of the government's possession and its use of the land loses its legal basis. Therefore, it seems that the judgment rendered by Branch 211 of the General Civil Court which is taking into account modifications made concerning its basis, approved by Branch 12 of the Appellate Court of Tehran Province, obliging the Tehran City Railway Company (Metro) to pay the current market price of a property is correct and acceptable, despite the fact abovementioned judgments are open to criticism.