Allowed

Dhanpati and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Dec 2014RFA/3414/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court allowed three civil miscellaneous applications: one to pass the first appeal; and two to bring legal representatives of deceased parties on record. Regarding the appeal, the Court disposed of the matter by relying on a prior judgment enhancing compensation for the same land acquisition.

What did the court decide?

The regular second appeal was disposed of in terms of the order dated 01.09.2014. Legal representatives of deceased appellants were brought on record.

Dhanpati and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

RFA No.3414 of 2011 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

RFA No.3414 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.12.2014

Dhanpati and others

... Appellants

Vs.

State of Haryana and others

¶9

... Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶11

Present:Mr. M. L.Sharma, Advocate for the appellants.

¶12

Mr. D.D.Gupta, Addl.A.G.Haryana.

¶13

Mr. Rahul Garg, Advocate for Mr. Manish Bansal, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

¶14

AMIT RAWAL J .

¶15

C.M.No.9242-CI-2012

¶16

The application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶17

C.M.No.9243-CI-2012

¶18

For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, legal representatives of deceased namely Balbir Singh son of Jage Ram who is stated to have died on 13.01.2006, as mentioned in the application, are ordered to be brought on record for the purpose of prosecuting the present appeal.

¶19

C.M. stands allowed.

¶20

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.12.06 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶21

RFA No.3414 of 2011 (O&M)

¶22

¶23

C.M.No.9244-CI-2012

¶24

For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, legal representatives of deceased namely Raghbir Singh son of Jage Ram who is stated to have died on 14.04.2006, as mentioned in the application, are ordered to be brought on record for the purpose of prosecuting the present appeal. C.M. stands allowed.

¶25

RFA No.3414 of 2011 (O&M)

¶26

The present regular second appeal arises against the order dated 30.11.2010 passed in LAC Case No.791 of 05.12.2006 pertaining to Award No.5 dated 29.12.2004 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector Urban Estate, Hisar at Camp Rohtak in respect of the land and area under acquisition is covered by Notification No.LAC(F) 2002/NTLA/72 dated 01.01.2002 and No. LAC(F) NTLA2002/128 dated 30.12.2002 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the Act’) respectively in respect of the land situated in the revenue estate of Para Tehsil and District Rohtak, acquired for the development and utilization of land for Commercial, Sector No.6, Rohtak under the Haryana Urban Development Authority.

¶27

As per the Award dated 30.11.2010 of the Reference Court, it is evident that the land in question had been acquired by the State of Haryana for a public purpose i.e. development and utilization

¶28

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.12.06 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶29

RFA No.3414 of 2011 (O&M)

¶30

¶31

of residential, transport, communication, Sector 6, Rohtak, under Haryana Urban Development Authority. The Land Acquisition Collector, Hisar, announced the Award No.5 dated 29.12.2004, by awarding compensation of 4,50,000/- per acre for Nehri land and 3,50,000/- for Gair Mumkin, Banjar Kadim, Bhood and Barani land, ` 5,50,000/- for land near the road upto on acre depth.

¶32

Reference Court, vide order dated 30.11.2010, after taking the evidence of the parties to the lis awarded the compensation at flat rate of ` 8,65,435/- per acre and also granted interest @ 12% per annum on the market value of the land for the period commencing on or from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act, in respect of the acquisition of such land to the date of the Award of the land Acquisition Collector or the date of taking possession of the land which is earlier, since it was a compulsorily acquisition. It also ordered that the landowners would be entitled to solatium of 30% on the market value in terms of the Section 23(2) of the Act.

¶33

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellants brought to the notice of this Court that the same very notification vide which land in question has been acquired had been subject matter of adjudication by this Court in RFA No.2250 of 2011 decided on 01.09.2014 titled as Risal Singh vs. State of Haryana and anothe r.

¶34

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.12.06 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶35

RFA No.3414 of 2011 (O&M)

¶36

¶37

Mr. D.D.Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana appearing on behalf of the State did not dispute aforesaid fact.

¶38

I have gone through the judgment dated 01.09.2014 and is of the view that the subject matter of the land acquisition is the same as has been in the aforementioned regular first appeal which has been disposed of along with other connected appeals. As per order dated 01.09.2014, this Court has enhanced the amount of compensation to 15 lacs per acre (rounded off) in respect of the land which is not located on the main bye-pass road and a compensation of 16,65,000/- per acre in respect of the land situated on northern bye-pass road and Sonepat to the tune of 16,65,000/- per acre.

¶39

Thus, the compensation, as per the order dated 01.09.2014 which has ordered to be payable to the landowners had been arrived at `18,31,500/- per acre upto the depth of two acres.

¶40

Accordingly, the present regular first appeal is disposed of in terms of order dated 01.09.2014. The landowners shall be entitled to statutory benefits under the Act.

¶41

Disposed of.

¶42

(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE

¶43

December 01, 2014 savita

¶44

SAVITA DEVI KADIAN 2014.12.06 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Dhanpati and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanpati and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jasmer Singh Vs Chanan Singh and Ors.

Krishan and Others Vs Mahabir and Others

Sonnit Mehra Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

Mukhtiar Kaur Vs Surjit Kaur and Ors.

Shanti Devi Vs O.P. Chaudhary & Ors.

Jarnail Singh Vs Naresh Kumar