Jage Ram vs Uoi & Anr.
2009 Latest Caselaw 5079 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+              LA.APP. No. 475/2009 & LA.APP.No.393/2009

                                           Decided on : 08.12.2009
IN THE MATTER OF :

       LA.APP. 475/2009

       UOI                                     ..... Appellant
                              Through : Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Adv.

                    versus

       JAGE RAM & ANR.                  ..... Respondents
                              Through: Mr. Kanwar Udai Bhan, Adv. for R-1.
                                       Ms. Indrani Ghose, proxy counsel
                                       for Ms. Shobhna Takiar, Adv.for R-2.

                                     AND
+      LA.APP. 393/2009

       JAGE RAM                                    ..... Appellant
                              Through: Mr. Kanwar Udai Bhan, Adv.
                    versus
       UOI & ANR.                              ..... Respondents
                              Through : Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Adv. for R-1.
                                         Ms. Indrani Ghose, proxy counsel
                                        for Ms. Shobhna Takiar, Adv. for R-2.

CORAM

* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

    1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the
       Judgment? No

    2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?   No

    3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?     No




LA.APP. 475/2009 & LA.APP.No.393/2009                         Page 1 of 3
 HIMA KOHLI, J.

1. By way of the present appeals, the appellants have assailed the

judgment and decree dated 16.10.2006 passed by the Reference court

pertaining to the land situated in village Kakrola, in respect of Award

No.1/93-94.

2. Counsel for the UOI states that the present appeals are covered

by a common judgment delivered by the Division Bench on 23.10.2008, in a

batch of matters pertaining to village Kakrola, lead matter being Ved

Prakash & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. registered as LAA No. 673/2008,

which fact is not denied by the counsel for the other side. Para 35 of the

aforesaid judgment is reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:

"35. 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."

3. Counsel for the UOI further states that his clients are in the

process of preferring an appeal against the aforesaid judgment before the

Supreme Court.

4. Guided by the aforesaid judgment dated 23.10.2008, passed in

the case of Ved Prakash (supra), the appeal preferred by appellant in LA.

APP.No.393/2009 is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation payable

to the appellant herein from Rs.1,09,500/- to Rs.1,20,500/- per Bigha, with

proportionate costs. The appellant shall also be entitled to all other

statutory benefits as awarded by the learned ADJ. However, it is clarified

that the appellant in LA. APP.No.393/2009 shall not be entitled to any

interest for a period of 807 days, in terms of the order dated 8.12.2009

passed in CM No.7543/2009 preferred by the appellant for condonation of

delay in filing the appeal. The appeal of the UOI, i.e., LA. APP.No.475/2009

is dismissed.

5. The trial court record be released. Files be consigned to the

record room. No orders as to costs.

HIMA KOHLI,J DECEMBER 08, 2009 sk