Delhi High Court
Nandroop vs Union Of India on 25 May, 2016
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LA.APP.681/2011
Date of Decision: 25.05.2016
NANDROOP ..... Appellant
Through Mr.Raghuvinder Goda, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondents
Through Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pathak,
Mr.Sunil Kumar Jha,
Mr.Kushal Raj Tater, Advs. for
UOI/LAC/L&B.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J. (ORAL)
CM Appln. 13359/2016
1. This is an application for early hearing of the case. Though
notice was issued in the application but there is no written response of
the respondent/UOI to the application.
2. Mr.S.K. Jha, proxy to Mr.S.K. Pathak, learned counsel for the
UOI submits that in view of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in Civil Appeal No.824/2013 (Nand Roop vs. UOI &
Anr.), he would have no objection if the land acquisition appeal is
heard expeditiously and on priority basis.
3. The application is allowed. With the consent of the parties, the
LA.APP.681/2011 is being taken up today i.e. 25.05.2016.
LA.APP.681/2011
1. The present land acquisition appeal is directed against the
judgment dated 05.05.2010 passed by the learned ADJ-01, Dwarka
Courts, New Delhi, in LAC No.186/09/06 (Om Prakash & Ors. vs.
UOI & Anrs.) in respect of land acquired in village Pochanpur, Delhi
vide award no.30/2002-03.
2. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for
short the 'Act') was issued for the acquisition of lands falling in
various villages including village Pochanpur in which the land of the
appellants fell on 13.12.2000. Thereafter, declaration under Section 6
and 17(1) of the Act were issued vide notification dated 07.12.2001
and 15.03.2002 respectively. The land of the appellants was acquired
on 11.09.2002.
3. The Land Acquisition Collector, after completing all the
formalities issued award No.186/09/06, whereby the compensation
payable was fixed at the rate of 13.82 lakhs per acre.
4. The appellants were not satisfied with the market value assessed
by the land acquisition collector and accordingly preferred a reference
petition under Section 18 of the L.A. Act before the land acquisition
collector for enhancement of compensation. The aforesaid application
was referred to the Trial Court for proper determination of the market
value of the acquired land.
5. The Reference Court vide judgment dated 05.05.2010 dismissed
the reference holding that the appellants are not entitled to any further
enhancement of compensation.
6. The Reference Court, in other references however, enhanced the
compensation for some of the lands which were acquired but such
enhancement was not applicable for the lands situated in Pochanpur
village where the land of the appellants was situated. Other
agriculturists/ land losers, thereafter, approached the High Court for
enhancement of compensation.
7. Vide order dated 28.08.2012, the Delhi High Court dismissed
the appeal on the ground of delay and latches. As against the aforesaid
order passed by the Delhi High Court, the appellant went in appeal
vide SLP (Civil) No.824/2013.
8. After condoning the delay, the Supreme Court vide order dated
27.03.2014 in SLP (Civil) No.824/2013 in Nand Roop vs. UOI &
Anrs. remanded the matter to the High Court to re-consider the appeal
filed by the claimant/appellant on merits and in accordance with law
without reference to the period of limitation.
9. The present appeal has come up for consideration on such order
of remand.
10. The land of the appellant fall in village Pochanpur which was
acquired along with all other three villages.
11. The Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.2091/2014 (SLP(C)
No.18883/2012; Impulse India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India and
Another) found that the compensation awarded to the land losers was
on the lesser side.
12. Thus, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of
the case as also other factors, the Supreme Court increased the
compensation so awarded to 21 lacs and 19 lacs for Block A and
Block B lands respectively. The aforesaid enhanced compensation
was held to be common to all the lands of villages Bharthal, Bijwasan,
Pochanpur and Dhul Saras villages. The appellants therein were also
found to be entitled to all the statutory benefits provided under the
provisions of the Land Acquisition Act.
13. The case of the appellants is covered by the judgment of the
Supreme Court delivered in Civil Appeal No. 2091/2014 (SLP(C)
No.18883/2012) (Impulse India P. Ltd. vs. Union of India & Anr.).
This fact is not disputed by the respondents.
14. The appeal is thus disposed of in terms of the judgment referred
to above namely Impulse India Pvt.Ltd vs. Union of India & Anr
delivered on 13.02.2014 in Civil Appeal No.2091/2014 (SLP (C)
No.18883/2012).
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J
MAY 25, 2016
ab
