Himachal Pradesh High Court
Shri Karma Dutt (Deceased vs Kamal Dev & Ors. on 5 January, 2022
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
.
ON THE 5th DAY OF JANUARY, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHARMA
REGULAR FIRST APPEAL NO. 3 OF 2022
Between:
1. SHRI KARMA DUTT (DECEASED
THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:
(i) LEKH RAJ, AGED 44 YEARS, (SON);
(ii) SADA NAND AGED 41 YEARS, (SON);
(iii) DEVINDER AGED 39 YEARS, (SON);
(iv) SMT. NARDA (DAUGHTER);
(v) SMT. SANTOSH (DAUGHTER);
(vi) SMT. DAYAVATI AGED 68 YEARS,
(WIFE); OF LATE KARMA DUTT,
ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE DUNGI
KANDYON, TEHSIL DADAHU,
DISTRICT SIRMAUR,
HIMACHAL PRADESH.
2. SHARMA DUTT
SON OF LATE BUDH RAM,
BOTH RESIDENTS OF MOHAL DUNGI
KANDOYN SUB TEHSIL
DADAHU, DISTRICT SIRMAUR,
HIMACHAL PRADESH
.... APPELLANTS
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 23:33:15 :::CIS
2
(BY MR. RUPINDER SINGH,
.
ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (POWER) TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF H.P. SHIMLA-2
2. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR,
HIMACHAL PRADESH POWER CORPORATION
LIMITED, UTTAM BHAWAN, SHIMLA-4
3. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
THROUGH DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
SIRMOUR, AT NAHAN HIMACHAL PRADESH.
4. THE GENERAL MANAGER
RENUKAJI PROJECT,
HPPCL, DADAHU,
DISTRICT SIRMOUR, H.P.
....RESPONDENTS.
(BY MR. SUDHIR BHATNAGAR AND
MR. DESH RAJ THAKUR, ADDITIONAL
ADVOCATES GENERAL, WITH MR.
NARENDER THAKUR AND MR. KAMAL
KISHORE SHARMA, DEPUTY ADVOCATES
GENERAL, FOR THE STATE)
(BY MR. VIKAS MISHRA,
ADVOCATE, FOR R-4)
Whether approved for reporting?.
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the Court passed the following:
JUDGMENT
.
CMP(M) No. 7 of 2022
By way of instant application filed under Section 5 of the
Limitation Act, prayer has been made by the applicants for condonation of
delay in filing the accompanying appeal. Learned counsel for the non-
applicants state that they do not intend to file reply to the application and
have no objection in case, prayer made in the application is allowed.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
averments contained in the application, which is duly supported by an
affidavit, this Court is convinced and satisfied that delay in maintaining the
accompanying appeal is neither intentional nor willful, rather same has
occurred on account of circumstances, which were completely beyond the
control of the applicants and as such, same deserves to be condoned.
3. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the application, delay in
filing the appeal, which in my considered view, has sufficiently been
explained, is condoned. The application stands disposed of.
4. Appeal be registered.
CMP(M) Nos. 8 & 9 of 2022
5. By way of instant applications filed under Order 22 Rules 3
and 9 and 11 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and
Section 5 of the Limitation Act, prayer has been made on behalf of the
applicants for bringing on record the legal representatives of deceased
.
appellant, who has expired on 1.1.2019, after condoning the delay occurred
in filing the accompanying application. Learned counsel representing the
non-applicants-appellants states that they do not intend to file any reply to
the applications and shall have no objection in case the prayer made in the
instant applications are allowed.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
averments contained in the application i.e, CMP(M) No. 9 of 2022, which is
duly supported by an affidavit, this Court is convinced and satisfied that
delay in maintaining the accompanying application i.e. CMP(M) No. 8 of
2022 is neither intentional nor willful, rather same has occurred on
account of circumstances, which were completely beyond the control of the
applicants and as such, same deserves to be condoned.
7. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the application, delay in
filing the application, which in my considered view, has sufficiently been
explained, is condoned.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused
averments contained in the applications bearing CMP(M) No. 8 of 2022,
which is duly supported by an affidavit as well as documents annexed
therewith, this court finds that sole appellant Karma Dutt has expired on
01.1.2019, leaving behind his legal representatives, as detailed in Annexure
.
A-2 annexed with the application. Since right to sue survives in favour of
the aforesaid persons, proposed to be substituted in place of sole appellant,
there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the
present application and same is allowed and persons detailed in Annexure
A-2 of the application bearing CMP(M) No. 8 of 2022, are ordered to be
substituted in place of the deceased appellant, whose name is ordered to be
deleted from the array of the parties.
9.
Registry is directed to carry out necessary corrections in the
memo of the parties on the basis of the amended memo, which has been
filed by learned counsel for the applicants-respondents alongwith this
application. The applications stand disposed of.
RFA No.3 of 2022
10. By way of aforesaid appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), challenge has been
laid to award dated 30.11.2019 passed by learned District Judge, Sirmaur
District at Nahan, H.P. in Reference petition No. 4-N/4 of 2013.
11. Undisputedly, the suit land belonging to claimant(s), situate in
village Dungi Kandyon, Tehsil Dadahu, District Sirmaur, H.P., as detailed
in the award, came to be acquired for public purpose; namely; construction
of "Renuka Ji Dam and its submergence area" and acquisition proceedings
.
commenced with the issuance of Notifications under Section 4 of the Act on
4.10.2008. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short 'LAC') passed common
award No. 612, dated 08.7.2010 and awarded compensation of the acquired
land as per the classification and nature of the land mentioned in the
award.
12. Claimants, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the amount of
compensation awarded by 'LAC', preferred reference petitions under Section
18 of the Act, before the learned Additional District Judge, Sirmaur District
at Nahan, seeking therein enhancement of compensation, awarded by the
Land Acquisition Collector. Learned District Judge vide impugned award
dated 30.11.2019, re-determined the market value of the acquired land and
enhanced the same at the rate of Rs.5,00,000/- per bigha irrespective of
nature and classification of land alongwith all statutory benefits as
mentioned in the award(s).
13. The appellants being aggrieved and dis-satisfied with the
aforesaid award passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sirmaur
District at Nahan, have approached this Court by way of above captioned
appeal, seeking therein to enhance the award passed by the learned
Additional District Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan.
14. It is not in dispute before this Court that similar situate
.
claimants, whose land also came to be acquired for construction of "Renuka
Ji Dam and its submergence area" in the acquisition proceedings
commenced with the publication of Notification issued under Section 4 of
the Act, had filed land reference petitions before the learned Additional
District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, praying therein to enhance the
compensation awarded by 'LAC' in its award No.704, dated 01.10.2012.
Those reference petitions were clubbed and disposed of by common award
passed in Reference Petition No.64-LAC/4 of 2015, dated 07.05.2018,
wherein the Reference Court re-determined the market value of entire land
irrespective of classification and nature of the land on uniform basis and
awarded a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- per bigha.
15. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid award
passed by learned District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, the
respondents in the aforesaid reference petitions, filed different appeals,
which came to be disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
judgment dated 09.12.2019 passed in RFA No.171 of 2016, titled as:
LAC, HPPCL & Anr. vs. Kamal Dev & Ors., (for short "Kamal Dev's
case") by holding that Reference Court has rightly determined the
enhanced market value of land at the rate of Rs.7,00,000/- per bigha,
irrespective of nature and classification of land in its award dated
.
07.05.2018 respectively.
16. Learned counsel, representing the respondents, while fairly
acknowledging the factum with regard to passing of judgment dated
09.12.2019 in "Kamal Dev's case" (supra), conceded that claimants-
respondents in the case at hand are also entitled for compensation at the
rate of Rs.7,00,000/- per bigha irrespective of nature and classification of
land as per the said judgment. They also acceded to the market value of
the land determined in "Kamal Dev's case" (supra).
17. Consequently, in view of detailed discussion made hereinabove
as well as fair stand adopted by the learned counsel for the respondents,
present appeal is allowed and it is ordered that directions contained in
"Kamal Dev's case" (supra), shall mutatis mutandis apply to the present
case also.
18. Respondents are directed to deposit the entire award amount
in the Registry of this Court within a period of eight weeks from today, if
not already deposited.
19. Interim order, if any, is vacated. All the miscellaneous
applications are disposed of.
5th January, 2022 (Sandeep Sharma),
(manjit) Judge
