Bhim Singh Decd. Thr. Lrs vs Union Of India & Anr.
2010 Latest Caselaw 818 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                              LA. APP. 134/2010

                                                 Date of decision : 11.02.2010

IN THE MATTER OF :

BHIM SINGH DECD. THR. LR'S                           ..... Appellants
                   Through: Mr. S.S. Gulia, Advocate


                         versus


UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                                 ...... Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Ramesh Ray, Advocate for R1/UOI.
                    Ms. Saumya Chitranshi, Advocate for Mr. Rajiv
                    Bansal, Advocate for R2/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 present appeal is directed against a judgment dated

04.06.2008 passed by the Reference Court in respect of land situated in

village Kakrola, covered under Award No.1/1993-94, pursuant to the

notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, on

06.06.1991.

2. Counsel for the appellants states that the present appeal is

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. 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 respondent/UOI concedes that the present case

is also covered by the aforesaid judgment. He, however, submits that his

clients are contemplating assailing the aforesaid judgment before the

Supreme Court. However, as on date, the appeal has not been filed.

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

the case of Ved Prakash (supra), the present appeal is partly allowed by

enhancing the compensation payable to the appellants from Rs.1,09,500/- to

Rs.1,20,500/- per Bigha. The appellants shall also be entitled to all other

statutory benefits as awarded by the learned ADJ.

5. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to the

record room.

(HIMA KOHLI) JUDGE FEBRUARY 11, 2010 rkb