Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1495 (PNJ)

Parsini v. State of Haryana

2003-10-29

S.S.NIJJAR

body2003
ORDER S.S. Nijjar, J. - At the time of hearing of RFAs 1199, 1200 and 1201 of 1982, the entire controversy had been settled by the Honble Supreme Court. However, there were some divergence of opinion between the counsel for the parties as to whether the appellants would be entitled to the benefit of Sections 28 and 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) with regard to the grant of 30% solatium and 15% interest from the date of the award given by the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala. However, even this controversy has now been settled by the Supreme Court in Union of India and another v. Raghubir Singh (dead) through LRs., 1989(2) SCC 754. 2. The relevant facts are that large tracts of land were acquired by the State of Haryana for setting up residential, commercial and industrial area subsequently named as Panchkula in district Ambala (now district Panchkula). For this purpose, the land was acquired in a number of villages which are mentioned in the awards given by the Land Acquisition Collector as also by the Additional District Judge. For the aforesaid purposes, notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 22.6.1973. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 8.6.1976. The Land Acquisition Collector gave the award on 11.6.1978. Against this award, references were filed under Section 18 of the Act before the Additionally District Judge, Ambala. The compensation was enhanced. The judgment was rendered by the Additional District Judge, Ambala, on 10.4.1982. 3. Some other land owners whose land has also been acquired had challenged the compensation awarded by filing RFA 1151 of 1983 and connected RFA. In the aforesaid RFA, High Court had granted compensation @ Rs. 23,750/- per acre. In the present case also, the Additional District Judge has relied on the judgment rendered by this Court on 18.7.1980/21.5.1981 in "Gurcharan Singh and another v. State of Haryana" (RFA 1137 of 1979) in which the High Court awarded compensation at the uniform rate of Rs. 23,750/- per acre. The aforesaid judgment rendered in RFA 1151 of 1983 was challenged by the land owners in the Supreme Court. 23,750/- per acre. The aforesaid judgment rendered in RFA 1151 of 1983 was challenged by the land owners in the Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the appellants has very fairly stated that although SLP had been granted in the aforesaid cases but subsequently, the Supreme Court has upheld the judgment of this Court and the Civil Appeals have been dismissed. In view of the above, the RFAs with regard to the enhancement of compensation shall have to be dismissed as in the present case the Additional District Judge has already granted compensation @ Rs. 23,750/- per acre relying on the earlier judgment of this Court. So far as the controversy with regard to the benefit of the provisions of the Act is concerned, the same is also concluded against the appellants. In Raghubir Singhs case (supra) the Supreme Court has categorically held that the benefit under Section 30(2) of the Amending Act can only be granted or awarded where the award is made by the Collector or by the Court between 30.4.1982 and 24.9.1984. In the present case, the judgment was rendered by the Additional District Judge, on 10.4.1982. Consequently, the appellants cannot be granted the benefit of the aforesaid provisions under the Act. Consequently, the above mentioned appeals are dismissed. Appeals dismissed.