Delhi High Court
Shri Om Prakash vs Uoi & Ors. on 3 December, 2009
Author: S.L.Bhayana
HIGH COURT OF DELHI: NEW DELHI
Judgment Reserved on: 20.11.2009
Judgment Delivered on: 03 .12.2009
LA.APP. No.388/2009
Shri Om Prakash ...... Appellant
Through: Mr. Kawar Udai Bhan Adv.
Versus
UOI & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Ramesh Ray, Adv. for R-1/UOI.
Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.L. BHAYANA
1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment? Yes
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest or not?
Yes
S.L. BHAYANA, J.
The appellants have preferred the present appeal against the
judgment and decree dated 18.10.2007, passed by the Additional
District Judge, Delhi in LAC No 316/2005(new)/05/1988(old).
2. The brief facts of the case are that Vide Notification
No.f10(6)88/L&B, dated 06.06.1991, issued under Section 4 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") large tract of land
situated in revenue village Kakrola was notified for acquisition for
public purpose viz. "for the planned development of Delhi." It was
followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Act and thereafter
Award No.1/93-94 came to be passed by the Land Acquisition
Collector. The total land of this village acquired was 8723 bighas and
16 biswas. In the award, the Land Acquisition Collector classified the
lands into three categories. He awarded Rs.96,875/-per bigha for
Block „A‟ land. For determining this market value, he followed the
recommendations of the Joint Secretary (Land & Building), Delhi
Administration contained in letter dated 03.05.1990. The LAC fixed
the minimum price of Block-B land at Rs.38,000/- per bigha, whereas
for the land falling in Block-C, the market value was fixed at
Rs.32,000/- per bigha.
3. The appellants not satisfied with the said fixation of the market
value of their land sought reference under Section 18 of the Act
before the learned Additional District Judge in LAC No.316/2005. The
learned ADJ answered the reference vide his judgment dated
06.05.2003. He did away with the categorization of the land into three
blocks and fixed uniform market value for the entire land. As per the
said award it was decided that the fair price and market value of the
land in dispute as on the date of the notification was Rs.1,25,000/- per
bigha. The land owner as well as Union of India challenged the said
award by filling appeal before this Court, whereby award dated
06.05.2003 passed by the learned ADJ was set aside and the matters
were remanded back to the reference Court with a direction to
adjudicate the matter afresh after allowing the parties to lead further
evidence.
4. The learned ADJ decided the reference vide his Award dated
18.10.2007 fixing the market value of the land in question at
Rs.1,09,500/- per bighas
5. Aggrieved by the said Award, the appellants preferred the
present appeal challenging the order dated 18.10.2007 passed by the
learned ADJ.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. Leaned counsel for the appellants, at the very outset, submits
that the issue had already come up for consideration before the
Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ved Prakash & Ors. Vs.
UOI, (LA.A. No.673 of 2008) and other connected matters decided
on 23.10.2008 whereby the abovesaid notification was challenged by
some of the land owners of the village Kakrola. While partly allowing
the appeals of the land owners the Division Bench has passed the
following order:
"On this reckoning, we are of the opinion that the market price
of the land in question as on 3.5.1990 should be
Rs.96,875+Rs.9,685. In this manner, as on 3.5.1990, the market
value would be Rs.1,06,560/-. We are of the opinion that the
learned ADJ rightly held that appreciation of 13 months @ 12%
is to be given. By applying this formula, the market value of the
land as on date of notification under Section 4 of the Act would
be Rs.1,20,500/- per bigha.
In these circumstances, the appeals of the land owners are
partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from
Rs.1,09,500/- to Rs.1,20,500/-. These appeals are allowed in the
aforesaid manner with proportionate costs. The appellants shall
also be entitled to all other statutory benefits, as awarded by the
learned ADJ. All the pending applications also stand disposed
of. As a consequence, the appeals preferred by the UOI are also
dismissed."
8. In view of the order passed by the Division Bench in the case of
Ved Prakash (supra), the appeal is also partly allowed by enhancing
the compensation from Rs.1,09,500/- to Rs.1,20,500/-.
9. Vide order dated 20.11.09, the appellants have already
conceded that they will not claim any interest for 443 days as there
was delay in filing this appeal by the appellants. The application for
condonation of delay in filing the appeal was allowed subject to the
conditions that he will not claim interest for this period of 443 days.
In this view of the matter, the appellants are not entitled for any
interest for 443 days delay in filing the appeal and also the costs of
the suit. However, the appellants shall be entitled to all other
statuary benefits, as awarded by the learned ADJ.
10. The appeal along with all pending applications stands disposed
of.
S.L.BHAYANA, J
December 03, 2009
