Punjab-Haryana High Court
The State Of Rajasthan vs Ravi Setia on 1 April, 2024
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044439
RSA-632-1992 (O&M)
and other connected cases 1 2024:PHHC:044439
140 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
1.RSA-632-1992 (O&M)
Government of Rajasthan and others
....Appellants
Versus
Ravi Setia
..Respondent
2.RSA-666-1992 (O&M)
Government of Rajasthan and others
....Appellants
Versus
Shrimati Kailash Ahuja
..Respondent
3.RSA-667-1992 (O&M)
Government of Rajasthan and others
....Appellants
Versus
Smt. Suman Setia
..Respondent
Date of decision: 01.04.2024
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present:- Mr. Ravinder Jain, Advocate for the appellants
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J (Oral)
1. With the consent of the learned counsel representing the
appellants, these three connected Regular Second Appeals shall stand
disposed of by this common order.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044439
RSA-632-1992 (O&M)
and other connected cases 2 2024:PHHC:044439
2. The respondent before this Court are the farmers. They
filed three separate suits for recovery of Rs.21,312/-, 28416/- and
42,624/-. It was the case of the farmers that they are entitled to
compensation for making the land uneven while digging the earth and
loss of crop when the appellants' contractor lifted the earth from the land
for construction of Rajasthan Feeder Canal Gang Canal Link Channel
from RD 215-220-. It was claimed that the defendant (appellant no.1)
gave undertaking to the plaintiff vide letter no. 978 dated 20.12.1984
that the contractor will do levelling work of the land and in case the
contractor does not fulfill his undertaking, the Government of Rajasthan
will do the needful. It was alleged that the contractor made pits of 6 to
10 feet deep in the plaintiff's land rendering the land totally unfit for
cultivation. Subsequently, a meeting was held on 24.03.1986 and it was
decided that the plaintiff will be paid compensation at the rate, which
shall be decided by the Land Acquisition Collector, Ganganagar.
Accordingly, the plaintiffs claim compensation at the rate of Rs.2800/-
per bigha for levelling the land and Rs.1200/- per bigha as rent for the
land. The trial court dismissed all the three suits, however, the First
Appellate Court upon re-appreciation of the evidence partly decreed the
suit. Challenging the correctness of such judgments passed by the First
Appellate Court, these appeals have been filed. On 27.03.1992, the
following order was passed:-
"Admitted.
However, the decree-holder is permitted
to withdraw the amount subject to his furnishing
suitable surety to the satisfaction of the trial court. In
case, the appellant succeeds in this appeal, in that
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044439
RSA-632-1992 (O&M)
and other connected cases 3 2024:PHHC:044439
event, the respondent will be liable to return the
amount along with interest at the rate of 12% per
annum. The appellant undertakes to deposit the
decretal amount along with interest within two
months from today."
3. These appeals have come up for hearing after a period of 32
years. The farmers have already withdrawn the amount. The learned
counsel representing the appellants contends that the land was levelled
by the Government as their contractor failed to level the same. He
submits that the Government cannot be made liable to pay damages for
loss of crop.
4. This Court has considered the submissions made by the
learned counsel representing the appellants.
5. It has come in evidence that there were pits as deep as 6 to
10 feet in the land of the farmers when the contractor handed over the
possession. It has come in evidence that the Government has utilized the
farmers' land for considerable period which has resulted in loss of crop.
6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, no ground to interfere
is made out.
7. Hence, dismissed.
8. All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also
disposed of.
01.04.2024 (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
