Punjab-Haryana High Court
Joga Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 12 November, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149195
CR-6576-2024 (O&M) --1--
263-U IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CR-6576-2024 (O&M)
Decided on:-12.11.2024
Joga Singh ....Petitioner..
vs.
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Ashok Bhardwaj, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
*****
HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral)
1. Prayer in the present civil revision petition is for issuance of
direction to reference Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Sangrur to
decide the execution application No.718 of 2019, titled as "Major Singh
and others vs. State of Punjab" within a time bound period and in terms of
orders dated 27.01.2016 passed by this Court in RFA-3367-2011 alongwith
other connected matters and order dated 21.07.2017 passed in CR-4676-
2017.
2. Admittedly, certain land owned by the petitioner was acquired
vide notifications dated 20.11.2006 and 29.04.2007, issued under Sections 4
and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short '1894 Act') respectively,
followed by an award dated 12.04.2008, whereby, the petitioner and other
persons were granted compensation to the tune of Rs.6 lacs per acre
including solatium for land of nine villages at flat rate and Rs.10 lacs per
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149195
CR-6576-2024 (O&M) --2--
acre for the land acquired of the village Khanauri.
3. Feeling dissatisfied, the land owners filed petition under
Section 18 of the Act, which was dismissed by the reference Court vide
award dated 15.12.2010. Thereafter, the land owners challenged the said
award before this Court by way of bunch of appeals seeking enhancement of
compensation and the same were allowed while enhancing the market value
to the tune of Rs.15,95,600/- per acre for the acquired land of nine villages
and Rs.21 lac per acre was enhanced at the uniform rate as regards village
Khanauri, vide decision dated 27.1.2016 (Annexure P-1). Thereafter, the
judgment debtor made part payment under the award to the decree
holder/petitioner except solatium and interest thereof, pursuant to the order
dated 27.02.2017 passed by the Additional District Judge, Sangrur and the
same was challenged before this Court in CR-4676-2017, which was
disposed of vide order dated 21.07.2017, whereby directions were issued to
decide the objections filed by the JDs, afresh. Later, vide order dated
20.12.2017 passed by the Additional District Judge, Sangrur, the execution
application was disposed of while granting amount of compensation along
with statutory reliefs. Thereafter, the petitioner and other land owners filed
execution application No.718 of 2019 and the same is pending since then
and till date, the enhanced amount of compensation has not been disbursed
to the petitioner and other land owners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
being aggrieved of the delay has filed the present revision petition for
issuance of direction to the Executing Court concerned to decide the
execution application expeditiously, in a time bound manner.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:149195
CR-6576-2024 (O&M) --3--
6. A perusal of record shows that execution application (Annexure
P-5) filed by the petitioner and other land owners on 29.07.2019, is still
pending and the petitioner is waiting to get his amount of compensation on
the basis of order dated 27.01.2016 and order dated 21.07.2017 (Annexures
P-1 and P-3 respectively).
7. In Rahul S. Shah Vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others
(2021) 6 SCC 418, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follow:-
"That the executing Court must dispose of execution
proceeding within 6 months from the date of filing which may be
extended only by recording reasons in writing for such delay."
8. In view of the above, the Court of Additional District Judge,
Sangrur (the Executing Court) is requested to dispose of the execution
petition bearing No.718-2019 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within
a period of next 3 months from today, as any further delay is going to cause
serious prejudice to the rights of the petitioner-land owner.
9. It is made clear that nothing said herein-above shall be
construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the execution
proceedings.
10. The present petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms.
11. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
12.11.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA)
sonika JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/ No
3 of 3
