The counsel for the appellants states that in LA App. No.30/2014 preferred against the same judgment and decree as impugned in this appeal, vide order dated 15^th December, 2015, the matter was remanded to the Reference Court and the Reference Court pursuant to remand has determined the market rate at Rs.45,524/- and the appellant in LA App. No.30/2014 has again preferred an appeal against the order aforesaid being LA App. No. 192/2016 which has on 21^st October, 2016 been admitted for hearing.

The counsel for the appellants states that the appellants in this appeal sought direction for payment of interim compensation of Rs.45,524 in accordance with the determination pursuant to remand in LA App. No.30/2014 but the said relief was declined and the appellant thus seeks the same order as the order dated 15^th December, LA.APP. 99/2014 Page 1 of 2

2015 in LA App. No.30/2014.

This appeal is disposed of in terms of order dated 15^th December, 2015 in LA App. No.30/2014 and is remanded back to the Reference Court. A copy of the order dated 15^th December, 2015 be annexed to this order.

The files of LA App. Nos.379/2014, 192/2016 and 30/2014, which were tagged to this file be de-tagged.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

¶22

SEPTEMBER 10, 2018

¶23

‘ak’..

Page 2 of 2

¶25

LA.APP. 99/2014

Deepak Chopra & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief