Allowed

Ram Mehar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Oct 2019RFA/3224/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the revision appeal for land acquisition compensation at Chandigarh. The court condoned a significant delay citing a leading Supreme Court precedent on land compensation. It clarified that while the compensation reduction applies, no interest accrues for the delayed period.

What did the court decide?

Delay condoned; appeal allowed; compensation awarded subject to 1280-day interest forfeiture.

Ram Mehar and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2019)

¶1

Shivani Gupta 2019.10.07 10:31 1

¶2

RFA No. 3224 of 2019 (O & M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

RFA No. 3224 of 2019 (O & M) Date of decision: 03.10.2019

Ram Mehar and others

....Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana and others

¶9

...Respondent(s)

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA

¶11

Present: Mr. Jagmohan Singh, Advocate, for Mr. Sonu Giri, Advocate, for Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate, for the appellants.

¶12

Ms. Vibha Tewari, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral)

¶14

C.M. No. 7805-CI of 2019

¶15

The present application has been filed for condonation of delay of 1280 days in filing the appeal.

¶16

In view of the matter being covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 11913-11945 of 2017, State of Haryana and another vs. Pushpendra Kumar and others decided on 05.09.2017, the application is allowed.

¶17

Delay is condoned, subject to the condition that the appellants shall not be entitled for the benefit of interest on the enhanced compensation for the said days.

¶18

RFA No. 3224 of 2019 (O & M)

¶19

The notification in question is dated 11.02.2010 and land was acquired of village Kankrola. Vide above said judgment in Pushpendra Kumar's case ( supra), the compensation has been reduced by 15% from

¶20

RFA No. 3224 of 2019 (O & M)

¶21

¶22

Rs.2,24,97,003/- per acre as awarded on 27.05.2016 in RFA No. 5316 of 2014, Pushpendra Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and another. The relevant portion of the judgment of the Apex Court in Pushpendra Kumar's case ( supra) reads thus:-

¶23

“In our opinion, the deduction of 15% towards development would have been sufficient, which ought to have been made in the instant cases, in the peculiar facts of the case, considering the potentiality of the area in question and the development which has taken place all around. This order not to be treated as a precedent in any other case. Thus, we modify the determination made by the High Court to the above extent only. Let deduction be made accordingly.” Resultantly, the market value works out at Rs.1,91,22,453/-.

¶24

The appeal is accordingly is allowed and the appellants are held entitled for the same amount alongwith statutory benefits. However, it is made clear that the land owners will not be entitled for the interest for the period of 1280 days and the decree be drawn up accordingly.

¶25

03.10.2019 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No

Ram Mehar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Mehar and Others v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R. P. Sharma Vs Food Corporation of India and Ors.

Balbir Singh Vs Union of India and Another

Gurmail Kaur Vs State of Punjab

P.K. Saini Vs Indian Council of Social Science Research and Ors.

Jage Ram and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others

Mahender Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.