Sh. Hukam Chand vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr.
2004 Latest Caselaw 199 Del

Citation : 2004 Latest Caselaw 199 Del
Judgement Date : 26 February, 2004

Delhi High Court

Sh. Hukam Chand vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. on 26 February, 2004

Equivalent citations: 110 (2004) DLT 580, 2004 (74) DRJ 18

Author: D Bhandari

Bench: D Bhandari, R Jain

JUDGMENT

Dalveer Bhandari, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 13.4.1998 passed by the learned Addl.District Judge deciding the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

2. The appellant has urged that he is also entitled to 1/18th share of Smt.Shakuntala, wife of his deceased brother Sh.Bhim Singh. It may be pertinent to mention that by order dated 29.3.1989 Mr.R.K.Sain, Addl.District Judge passed the order which reads as under:-

" 1. Vide judgment dated 26.11.88 IP No.5, Hukam Chand was held entitled to receive 1/18th share and compensation assessed in the name of Smt.Shakuntala IP No.4 was kept pending till claim is settled between her and Hukam Chand. Hukam Chand moved application and examined Smt.Shakuntala IP No.4 who stated that she does not claim any right, title or interest in the compensation pertaining to her late husband and the share of compensation payable to her be paid to Hukam Chand IP No.5.

2. In the light of the statement of the parties compensation pertaining to IP No.4 Smt.Shakuntala be also paid to Sh.Hukam Chand IP No.5. Voucher be issued accordingly."

3. This order has been passed after recording the statement of Smt.Shakuntala, wife of Tara Chand, r/o Village Saharanpur in which she had mentioned that she was married to Bhim Singh and after his death she had gone for the second marriage with Tara Chand and she categorically mentioned that she has no claim to the share of her first husband Bhim Singh. It is also stated that the appellant has no other brother.

4. In this view of the matter, the appellant on the strength of the order of the Addl.District Judge dated 29.3.1989 is entitled to 1/18th share of Smt.Shakuntala also Along with his own share of 1/8th. Total share to which now the appellant would be entitled to is 1/9th. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that he is not pressing his appeal for enhancement in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.1837/2002 Union of India Vs. Ram Phool & Anr. .

6. This appeal is accordingly disposed of. The parties to bear their own costs.