Allowed delayed appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, upholding earlier enhancement of compensation while denying entitlement to interest for the delay period.
Allowed appeal keeping in view of enhancement but denied entitlement to interest for 3708 days on enhanced compensation.
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.
SHIVANI GUPTA 2020.01.24 16:45 1
RFA No. 3601 of 2018 (O & M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RFA No. 3601 of 2018 (O & M) Date of decision: 21.01.2020
Naresh Kumar
....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA
Present: Mr. Ram Pal Verma, Advocate, for the appellant.
Ms. Vibha Tewari, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Pritam Saini, Advocate, for HSIDC. G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. (Oral)
C.M. No. 8114-CI of 2018
Application for condonation of delay of 3708 days in filing the appeal is allowed in view of averments made in the application duly supported by affidavit conditionally keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Imrat Lal and others vs. Land Acquisition Collector and others, 2014 (14) SCC 133 and Dhiraj Singh (D) through L.Rs. and others vs. Haryana State and others, 2014 (14) SCC 127 that the appellants are not be entitled for the benefit of interest for 3708 days on the enhanced compensation.
RFA No. 3601 of 2018 (O & M)
The present appeal has been filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short 'the Act') against the order of the Reference Court, Sonepat dated 01.04.2008. The notification in question is dated
RFA No. 3601 of 2018 (O & M)
2
21.11.2002. The Reference Court has granted uniform compensation @ Rs.4,26,000/- per acre for the villages Barhi and Garhi Kesari upto the depth of 4 acres from the National Highway whereas the award of the Collector was upheld for the land beyond the said distance. The acquisition was for the development of the Industrial Estate, Phase II in Tehsil Gannaur, District Sonepat. The said amount was enhanced by this Court in RFA No. 3328 of 2008, Shingari Devi (D) through L.Rs. and others vs. State of Haryana and others on 03.11.2015 by allowing the appeals of other land owners and dismissing the appeals of HSIDC as under:-
“14. Considering the aforesaid facts, in my opinion, the landowners deserve to be granted increase @ 12% per annum for the time gap of five years on the value of the land as assessed in Umed Singh's case (supra), where notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 17.9.1997 pertaining to the adjoining land and applying the same principle regarding belting, the landowners are held entitled to compensation @ Rs. 10,00,000/- per acre for the land abutting GT road upto a depth of 2 acres and Rs.5,80,000/- (rounded off) per acre for rest of the land located behind that. The landowners shall also be entitled to all the statutory benefits available to them under the Act.
15. For the reasons mentioned above, the appeals filed by the landowners are allowed and the appeals filed by HSIIDC are dismissed.”
It is conceded amongst the counsels that SLP (C) No. 2589 of
2016, Shingari Devi (D) through L.Rs. vs. State of Haryana was dismissed on 05.02.2016.
Resultantly, keeping in view the above, the present appeal is allowed in the same terms. However, the appellants are not entitled for the
RFA No. 3601 of 2018 (O & M)
3
benefit of interest for 3708 days on the enhanced compensation.
21.01.2020 (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) shivani JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the condonation of a 3708-day delay in filing the reference under appeal is maintainable.
Whether the appellant is entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation awarded by the earlier judgment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Imrat Lal and others vs. Land Acquisition Collector and others, 2014Referred¶15
Imrat Lal and others vs. Land Acquisition Collector and others, 2014 (14) SCC 133 · Who else cites this
Dhiraj Singh (D) through L.Rs. and others vs. Haryana State and others, 2014Referred¶15
Dhiraj Singh (D) through L.Rs. and others vs. Haryana State and others, 2014 (14) SCC 127 · Who else cites this
Shingari Devi (D) through L.Rs. and others vs. State of HaryanaRelied on¶20
RFA No. 3328 of 2008, Shingari Devi (D) through L.Rs. and others vs. State of Haryana and others
Shingari Devi (D) through L.Rs. vs. State of HaryanaReferred¶23
SLP (C) No. 2589 of 2016, Shingari Devi (D) through L.Rs. vs. State of Haryana
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Naresh Kumar
State of Haryana
G.S. Sandhawalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
