Bhoj Kumar Sharma vs Union Of India & Anr
2010 Latest Caselaw 858 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                              LA. APP. 81/2010

                                                 Date of decision : 15.02.2010

IN THE MATTER OF :

BHOJ KUMAR SHARMA                                          ..... Appellant
                         Through: Mr. S.K. Rout, Advocate with
                         Mr. M.K. Pradhan, Advocate and
                         Ms. Sunita Kumari, Advocate.


                         versus


UNION OF INDIA & ANR                                  ..... Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Ramesh Ray, Advocate for R1/UOI.
                    Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Advocate for R2/DDA.


  CORAM
* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

     1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may         Yes
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

     2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?        Yes

     3. Whether the judgment should be                Yes
        reported in the Digest?


HIMA KOHLI, J. (ORAL)

1. The present appeal is directed against a judgment dated

09.02.2007 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 appellant 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/Union of India fairly states that the

appeal preferred by the Union of India, registered as LAA No.403/2008

challenging the same judgment and decree dated 09.02.2007 was dismissed

by the Division Bench on 23.10.2008 alongwith Ved Prakash & Ors.(supra).

He 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 present appeal is partly allowed by

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

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

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

that the appellant shall not be entitled to claim interest on the enhanced

compensation for the period of delay of 889 days in preferring the appeal

and costs in the appeal, in terms of the order dated 21.01.2010 passed in

CM 1222/2010 preferred by the appellant for condonation of delay in filing

the appeal.

5. Appeal is disposed of. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.

File be consigned to the record room.

(HIMA KOHLI) JUDGE FEBRUARY 15, 2010 rkb