Ram Sarup (Deceased) Through Lrs vs Union Of India & Anr
2010 Latest Caselaw 1561 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                            LA. APP.120/2010

                                           Date of decision : 19.03.2010
IN THE MATTER OF :

RAM SARUP (DECEASED) THROUGH LRs                ..... Appellants
                 Through: Mr. S.K. Rout, Advocate with
                 Mr. M.K. Pradhan and Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advs.

                        versus


UNION OF INDIA & ANR                            ..... Respondents
                   Through: Mr. Ramesh Ray, Advocate for R1/UOI.
                   Mr. Kunal Sharma, 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

27.01.2007 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 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/Union of India fairly states that

the appeal preferred by the Union of India, registered as LAA

No.900/2008 challenging the same judgment and decree dated

27.01.2007 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 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. However, it is clarified that the appellants shall not be entitled to

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

853 days in preferring the appeal and costs in the appeal, in terms of

the orders passed today in CM 2311/2010 preferred by the appellants

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
MARCH     19, 2010
rkb