Same Singh & Anr vs Union Of India & Anr
2010 Latest Caselaw 1956 Del

18
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                        LA. APP. 217/2010

                                                 Date of decision : 15.04.2010
IN THE MATTER OF :

        SAME SINGH & ANR                              ..... Appellants
                                     Through : Mr. Deepak Khosla, Adv.

                   versus

        UNION OF INDIA & ANR                          ..... Respondents
                                     Through : Mr. Ramesh Ray, Adv. for UOI.
                                               Mr. Rajesh Manchanda, Adv.
                                               for DDA.

  CORAM
* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

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

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

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

HIMA KOHLI, J. (ORAL)

1. The land of the appellant situated in village Tikri Kalan was

acquired by the respondent/UOI vide preliminary notification issued under

Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as „the

Act‟) on 24.07.1995. This was followed by the declaration under Section 6

of the Act dated 22.08.1995. In view of the urgency of the scheme, the

provisions of Section 17(1) of the Act were also made applicable and the

possession of the land was taken over on 21.09.1995. Thereafter, the Land

Acquisition Collector made and pronounced his award under Section 11 of

the Act, being Award No. 2/1997-98 dated 23.07.1997. In his award, the

Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the land at the rate

of Rs.1,68,000.00 per bigha for category "A" leveled land and

Rs.1,26,340.00 for category "B" land, besides other statutory benefits.

2. Dis-satisfied with the said determination of the market value of

the land, the appellant preferred a Reference Petition under Section 18 of

the Act for enhancement of the compensation, which was referred to the

court of the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi. The learned Additional

District Judge vide order and judgment dated 18.01.2006 declined to grant

any enhancement in the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition

Collector. However, other statutory benefits were granted by the learned

Reference Court in accordance with law.

3. The appellant still dissatisfied by the enhancement granted by

the learned Reference Court, preferred the present appeal seeking

compensation at the rate of Rs. 2,18,000.00 per bigha besides the statutory

benefits. As there was delay of 1380 days in preferring the appeal, today

counsel for the appellant made a statement in CM No.3334/2010 that in the

event any enhancement is granted by this Court, the appellant would not

claim interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of delay and

also not press for costs of the appeal. On his statement, the delay in filing

the appeal was condoned subject to the condition that the appellant would

not be entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of

delay, i.e., 1380 days and also the costs of the appeal.

4. It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that a Division

Bench of this Court in a batch of matters including LAA No. 193/2006

entitled Pratap Singh deceased through LRs vs. Union of India and Ors.,

decided on 19.12.2008, determined the market value of the land acquired in

the same village through various notifications at various rates. However, in

respect of the land acquired through the notification dated 27.07.1995, the

market value was assessed at Rs.2,15,160.00 per bigha for land falling in

category "A" and at Rs.1,73,500.00 for category "B" land. In addition to the

market value, the following statutory benefits as granted by the Reference

Court were also upheld:-

(a) 12 % additional amount on the above market value of land under section 23 (1A) of the Act.

(b) 30% solatium on the above market value of land under section 23 (2) of the Act.

(c) Interest under section 28 of the Act at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of dispossession for the first year and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the date of the tender of compensation, which includes the benefit granted by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunder Vs. Union of India reported as 2001 (93) DLT 569.

5. Counsel for the respondent/UOI concedes that the present case

is also covered by the aforesaid judgment. He further states that the

aforesaid judgment in the case of Pratap Singh (supra) has attained finality

in view of the fact that the Special Leave Petition preferred by the

respondent/Union of India as also by the landowners, registered as

SLP(Civil) No. 573-628/2010 has been dismissed by the Supreme Court vide

order dated 05.01.2010.

6. Guided by the judgment in the case of Pratap Singh (supra), it is

held that the market value for the land falling in the category of „A‟ shall be

maintained at Rs.2,15,160.00 per bigha and for category „B‟ land at

Rs.1,73,500.00. In addition to the market value, statutory benefits as

granted to the appellant in the case of Pratap Singh (supra) shall also be

granted to the appellants herein. However, the appellant would not be

entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of 1380

days of delay and costs of the appeal.

7. The appeal is disposed of.

                                                             HIMA KOHLI,J
      APRIL      15, 2010
      sk