Delhi High Court
Vijay Kumar vs Uoi & Anr. on 28 January, 2010
Author: Hima Kohli
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LA.APP. No. 346/2008
Decided on : 28.01.2010
IN THE MATTER OF :
VIJAY KUMAR ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. S.S. Gulia, Adv.
versus
UOI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Ramesh Ray, Adv. for UOI.
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
HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated
15.12.2006 passed by the learned ADJ in respect of award No.2/DCW/2004-
05 pertaining to the land situated in village Tikrikalan, Delhi.
2. Counsel for the appellant states at the outset that the present case is
covered by the judgment of the 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.
3. 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 17.12.2002. This was followed by the declaration under Section 6
of the Act dated 11.12.2003. Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Collector
made and pronounced his award under Section 11 of the Act, being Award
No. 2/DCW/2004-05 dated 20.09.2004. In his award, the Land Acquisition
Collector assessed the market value of the land at the rate of Rs.3,27,083/-
per bigha for category "A" leveled land and Rs.2,91,666/- for category "B"
land, besides other statutory benefits.
4. The appellant dis-satisfied with the said determination of the
market value of the land, preferred a reference 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 15.12.2006 enhanced the
compensation to Rs.3,92,500/- per bigha and Rs.3,50,000/- per bigha for
Block „A‟ and Block „B‟, respectively. However, other statutory benefits
were granted by the learned reference court in accordance with law.
5. The appellant preferred the present appeal seeking
compensation at the rate of Rs.2,68,000/- per bigha besides the statutory
benefits. As there was delay of 8 months and 9 days in preferring the
appeal, the application for seeking condonation of delay, registered as CM
No.2678/2008 was allowed subject to the condition that the appellant would
not claim interest for the period of delay.
6. 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 17.12.2002, 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.
7. 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.
8. Drawing an analogy from the case of Pratap Singh (supra) with
which the counsel for the appellants seeks parity, 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 appellant
herein. However, the appellant would not be entitled to claim interest on
the enhanced compensation, for the period of 8 months 9 days of delay.
9. The appeal is disposed of.
HIMA KOHLI,J
JANUARY 28, 2010
sk
