The State appealed against compensation awarded for land acquisition in Faridabad. The court dismissed the appeal, holding that compensation was correctly assessed based on the court's own earlier judgment in Ved Pal's case.
The appeal for reduction in compensation and the application for condonation of delay were dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
Civil Misc. No. 1900/CI of 2009 and R. F. A No. 798 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of decision : 16.2.2009
State of Haryana and another ... Appellants vs Smt. Dulari Devi .... Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. Navneet Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The State has approached this court through the present appeal for reduction in the compensation.
Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 8.5.1995, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Haryana acquired land in Village Unchagaon, District Faridabad, for public purpose namely for development and utilisation of land as institutional, residential and commercial for Sector-61, Faridabad. The learned Land Acquisition Collector (for short, “the Collector”), assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 4,00,000/per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners/claimants filed objections. The learned Additional District Judge, on reference under Section 18 of the Act, enhanced the compensation @ of Rs. 450/- per square yard, relying on judgment of this court in R. F. A. No. 2501 of 2001- Ved Pal and others vs State of Haryana and others , decided on 3.5.2006.
Learned counsel for the applicants/appellants very fairly submits that the learned court below has assessed the compensation payable to the landowners on account of acquisition of land relying upon judgment of this court in Ved Pal's case (supra). As the compensation has been assessed by the learned Reference Court relying upon a judgment of this court, I do not find any merit in the present appeal, accordingly the same is dismissed.
As the appeal itself is without any merit, I do not find any reason to condone the delay of 212 days in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the application for condonation of delay is also dismissed.
( Rajesh Bindal) Judge
16.2.2009 vs.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the compensation assessed by the Reference Court relying on this Court's own judgment should be reduced.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ved Pal and others vs State of Haryana and othersRelied on¶9
R. F. A. No. 2501 of 2001-Ved Pal and others vs State of Haryana and others
2 provisions across 1 enactments
State of Haryana and another
Smt. Dulari Devi
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
