Delhi High Court
Chandan (Deceased)Through Lrs. & ... vs Uoi & Ors. on 4 February, 2010
Author: Hima Kohli
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ R.F.A. No.86/2002
Decided on 04.02.2010
IN THE MATTER OF :
CHANDAN (DECEASED)THROUGH LRs. & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through : Mr. Inder Singh, Adv.
versus
UOI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Ramesh Ray, Adv.
CORAM
* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
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? Yes
HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)
1. The present appeal is filed by the appellants/land owners
against the judgment dated 10.10.2001 passed by the learned ADJ on
a reference received under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 (in short 'the Act') granting enhancement of compensation @
Rs.34,150/- per bigha as on 19.8.1976, by relying on a judgment of
this Court passed in a batch of appeals, lead matter being RFA
No.585/1987 entitled Bedi Ram vs. UOI decided on 23.3.2001,
reported as 93 (2001) DLT 150.
2. Aggrieved by the amount of compensation granted by the
Reference Court, the appellants have preferred the present appeal
claiming compensation @ Rs.1,00,000/- per bigha, i.e., Rs.100/- per
sq. yard. In the case of Bedi Ram (supra), the Division Bench
considered the appeals preferred by the land owners/claimants whose
land situated in village Kondli, Delhi, was acquired through two
separate notifications under Section 4(1) of the Act. The first
notification was issued on 8.2.1973, which culminated in Award
No.2/78-79 made on 8.5.1978. The second notification under Sections
4 & 6 of the Act was issued on 19.8.1976, which culminated in Award
No.4/79-80 made on 22.5.1979.
3. Insofar as the market value of the land pertaining to the
land acquired through an earlier notification dated 8.2.1973 was
concerned, the Division Bench held that compensation was payable @
Rs.22,850/- per bigha. In respect of land covered by a subsequent
notification dated 19.8.1976, the Division Bench allowed the
progressive increase @ 12% per annum for each year separately over
and above the market value of Rs.8,064/- per bigha as on 30.11.1959
and fixed the fair market value of the land in village Kondli at
Rs.34,150/- per bigha, as on 19.8.1976. Over and above the amount
of compensation, the appellants therein were held entitled to payment
of solatium and interest as per the order of the Reference Court. In
addition to the enhance market value, they were also held entitled to
payment of additional amount @ 12% per annum for the period
commencing from the date of publication of the notification under Sub-
section (1) of Section 4 of the Act to the date of the award of the
Collector or the date of taking over possession, whichever is earlier, in
all cases where the award was made by the Collector after 30.4.1982
or where reference was pending before the Reference Court on
30.4.1982. It was however held that the additional amount would not
be payable to such of the appellants in whose case the award was
made by the Collector prior to 30.4.1982 and reference petition was
decided prior to 30.4.1982, on the ratio of the judgment of the
Supreme Court in the case of K.S. Paripoornan vs. State of Kerala,
reported as (1994) 5 SCC 593. It was also directed that in case the
interest was ultimately held payable on solatium by the Supreme Court
in a reference made to the Larger Bench, vide order dated 10.8.1998
in the case of Kapur Chand Jain (dead) & Ors. vs. State of Government
of H.P. & Ors., reported as AIR 1999 SC 3470, the appellants therein
would also be entitled to be paid interest. While disposing of the
appeals of the land owners on the aforesaid terms, the cross appeals
of the respondent/UOI were dismissed by the Division Bench.
4. Counsels for the parties state that the judgment in the case
of Bedi Ram (supra) has attained finality as neither the appellant nor
the UOI preferred any appeal against the same. It is pertinent to note
that the respondent/UOI had filed an appeal against the impugned
judgment, registered as RFA No.733/2007 entitled UOI vs. Chandan
& Ors. The limited issue raised by the respondent/UOI was as to
whether the amount of compensation awarded by the Reference Court
was in accordance with law and in consonance of the judgment in the
case of Bedi Ram (supra). In the course of arguments, the UOI
confined its challenge to the issue of extension of benefit under
Section 23-1A of the Act to the land owners. It was submitted that as
the award in question was passed on 22.5.1979, therefore, the benefit
under Section 23-1A of the Act could not be extended to the land
owners.
5. The aforesaid submissions were considered by the Division
Bench and, vide order dated 3.2.2005, the judgment and decree of
reference was modified to the extent that it was held in view of the
decision of the Supreme Court in the case of K.S. Paripoornan (supra),
the appellants therein could not be entitled to the benefit of Section
23-1A of the Act, the award having been passed prior to the cut off
date, i.e., 30.4.1982. However, the issue with regard to the amount
of compensation was not considered by the Division Bench in view of
the judgment in the case of Bedi Ram (supra).
6. Counsels for the parties state that even in the present case,
notifications under Sections 4 & 6 of the Act were issued on 19.8.1976
and hence the present case is covered by the judgment in the case of
Bedi Ram (supra) and may be disposed of on the same analogy.
7. The aforesaid submission is borne out from a perusal of the
impugned judgment, which shows that the reference order was passed
in respect of the land situated in village Kondli, in respect of which
award No.4/79-80 came to be made on 22.5.1979, pursuant to
notifications issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Act on 19.8.1976. The
present appeal is accordingly disposed of on the same lines as in the
case of Bedi Ram (supra). The market value of the land in question is
maintained at Rs.34,150/- per bigha, along with other statutory
benefits as may be payable to the appellants mentioned in para 3
herein above, except for the benefits under Section 23-1A of the Act,
in view of the fact that in the present case, the award was made by
the Collector prior to the date, 30.4.1982.
8. No orders as to costs.
(HIMA KOHLI)
FEBRUARY 04, 2010 JUDGE
sk
