Delhi High Court
Subh Ram vs Union Of India & Anr on 19 March, 2010
Author: Hima Kohli
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LA. APP. 110/2010
Date of decision : 19.03.2010
IN THE MATTER OF :
SUBH RAM ..... Appellant
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. S.K. Sethi, 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 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.838/2008 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 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 659
days in preferring the appeal and costs in the appeal, in terms of the
orders passed today in CM 2244/2010 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
MARCH 19, 2010
rkb
