Delhi District Court
Sh. Jeet Ram & Ors. vs Union Of India on 7 November, 2007
1
IN THE COURT OF SHRI YASHWANT KUMAR,
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (LAC) : DELHI
LAC No. M-78/06
Sh. Jeet Ram & Ors. Versus Union of India
ORDER
1 By this order, I shall dispose of an application dt. 13.10.1993 U/Sec.151, 152 & 153 CPC filed by the applicants for an order calling the revised statement u/sec. 19 from the Land Acquisition Collector and for orders in enhancement & correction in the judgment dt.17.07.1986.
2 I have heard the counsel for the parties and have perused the materials on record.
3 The case of the applicant is that the reference u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was filed by petitioner no.1, Sh.Jeet Ram S/o Sh. Shiva Ram for land measuring 6 bighas 4 biswas, Sh.Hari Ram S/o Sh. Shiv Ram, claimant no.2 filed reference for land measuring 5 bighas 6 biswas, claimant no.3 Dewan Singh S/o Sh.Deepa for land measuring 5 bighas 3 biswas, claimant nos.4 to 15 namely, Sh.Narain Singh, Rattan Singh, Maha Singh, Bharat Singh and Sardar Singh - sons of Sh.Ram Pershad, Smt.Chand Kaur D/o Sh.Ram Pershad, Smt.Dhan Kaur @ Chhand Kaur W/o Sh.Ram 2 Pershad, Om wati @ Bhagwati w/o Sh.Zile Singh, Sh.Gyanendra Singh, Anil Kumar, Inderjeet Singh and Sh.Jai Parkash - sons of Sh.Zile Singh s/o Sh.Ram Pershad filed reference for land measuring 9 bighas 11 biswas as per their shares. It is further stated that the Land Acquisition Collector while forwarding the reference u/s 18 of the LA Act to the court submitted the statement u/s 19 of the LA Act in which he had mentioned land measuring 9 bighas 11 biswas for claimant nos.4 to 13 & 15. The Land Acquisition Collector had not submitted the particulars of the land of claimant nos. 1, 2, 3, & 14. The claimants filed the objection to the statement u/s 19 of the LA Act before the court thereby raised the objection to the above facts. The UOI filed reply to the said objections and admitted the same and stated that the names are mentioned in the revised statement u/s 19 of the LA Act, but no revised statement u/s 19 of the LA Act was filed by UOI and the case has been decided on 17.07.1986. It is further stated that when the claimants filed objection to the above effect and UOI admitted the objection of the claimants but despite of this, no revised statement u/s 19 of the LA Act was filed by UOI. It was the duty of the Land Acquisition Collector to submit all the particulars of the land acquired in the statement u/s 19 of the LA Act. 4 The reference was decided by the Ld. Predecessor Court vide the judgment dt. 17.07.1986. Thereafter, an application was filed 3 by the applicants for correction of the said judgment and for that purpose, the original file was called for by the Ld. Predecessor Court. However, it was found that the original file was not consigned to record room and after the efforts made, the original file was not traceable. The Ld. Predecessor Court vide letter dt. 14.07.2005 requested to the Ld. District & Sessions Judge, Delhi to grant permission for re-construction of the reference file for disposal of the application u/sec. 151, 152 & 153 CPC r/w/sec. 151 CPC filed by the applicants. It reveals from the order dt. 19.09.2005 of the Ld. Predecessor Court that the Ld. District & Sessions Judge, Delhi passed an order for reconstruction of the file. Thereafter, the Ld. Predecessor Court directed the Ld. Counsel as well as the LAC to place on record the relevant papers and documents. The Ld. Counsel for the applicants filed copy of the written statement, objections to the statement u/sec. 19 of the LA Act, reply to the objections, copy of memo of parties and also copy of the judgment dt. 17.07.1986. The Patwari from the LAC office also filed the certified copies of the documents i.e. the statement u/sec. 19 of the LA Act, revised statements u/sec. 19 of the LA Act, reference u/sec. 18 of the LA Act, award no.3/1980-81, Khataunies, suggestion report & Naqsha Muntzamin. In the objection to the statement u/sec. 19 of the LA Act, the applicants specifically mentioned that the names of Jeet Ram, Hari Ram, Diwan Singh and Inderjeet were not mentioned and the name of petitioner no.10 was not correctly 4 mentioned. In fact, the name of the said petitioner is Smt.Dhan Kaur @ Chhan Kaur. Likewise, the name of petitioner no.11 was also not correctly mentioned. The correct name of the petitioner no.11 is Smt.Bhog Wati instead of Om Vati. Reply to the objections was also filed that the revised statement u/sec. 19 of the LA Act has been filed wherein the correct names of the petitioners have been mentioned. Perusal of the revised statement u/sec. 19 of the LA Act also reveals that the names of Sh.Jeet Ram, Diwan Singh and Hari Ram apart from other petitioners in whose names, the compensation has been assessed.
5 The counsel for the applicants, in support of his arguments, has relied upon the judgments reported in the case of Bhagwan Dass & Anr. Vs UOI AIR 1980 Delhi 197, it was held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that u/sec. 19, it was the duty of the Collector to give full particulars of the extent of the land for the information of the court and refusal to exercise the power of amendment in such a case as this would be to misuse that power. In Ram Kumar & Ors Vs UOI & Ors JT 1991 (1) SC 582, it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that once an application is moved for reference, it becomes the duty of the collector to send full information of the entire land acquired and thereafter it is the duty of the court to decide the matter in accordance with law. No doubt, in the present reference, the revised statement u/sec. 19 of the LA Act was filed 5 after passing of the judgment dt. 17.07.1986 which reveals the names of the petitioners/ applicants against the khasra numbers. Meaning thereby, there was a mistake on the part of the Collector. If the revised statement u/sec. 19 of the LA Act could have been filed during the pendency of the proceedings of the reference u/sec. 18 of the LA Act i.e. prior to adjudication of the said reference which is the statutory duty of the Collector, such an application which has been filed by the applicants herein was not required to be filed. It is well settled preposition of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and by the Hon'ble High court of Delhi that the claimants whose lands have been acquired by the Govt. should not suffer for compensation due to mistake of the collector. Therefore, in view of the above judgments of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the judgment dt. 17.07.1986 is modified to the extent that the applicants are also allowed to enhancement in compensation as per their shares mentioned against the khasra numbers in the revised statement u/sec. 19 of the LA Act filed by the LAC. Besides it, the applicants shall also be entitled to all the benefits of interest and statutory payments of the LA Act in the enhanced compensation. This order shall be treated & read as a part of the judgment dt. 17.07.1986 passed in LAC No.91/81 titled Jeet Ram & Ors Vs UOI. Accordingly, this application is disposed of. 6
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned LAC to make the payment of the enhanced amount of compensation to the petitioners/ applicants within three months from today. While making the calculations due regard shall be made to deduct the amount initially arrived at by the LAC to avoid any duplication. There shall be no order as to costs. The file be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open court ( YASHWANT KUMAR )
on 07.11.2007 ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE (LAC)
DELHI
7
LAC No. M-78/06
07.11.2007
Present - None
Vide separate order dictated and announced in the open court, an application dt. 13.10.1993 U/Sec.151, 152 & 153 CPC filed by the applicants for an order calling the revised statement u/sec. 19 from the Land Acquisition Collector and for orders in enhancement & correction in the judgment dt.17.07.1986 is disposed of. This order shall be treated & read as a part of the judgment dt. 17.07.1986 passed in LAC No.91/81 titled Jeet Ram & Ors Vs UOI.
A copy of this order be sent to the concerned LAC to make the payment of the enhanced amount of compensation to the petitioners/ applicants within three months from today. While making the calculations due regard shall be made to deduct the amount initially arrived at by the LAC to avoid any duplication. There shall be no order as to costs. The file be consigned to Record Room.
( YASHWANT KUMAR ) ADJ/LAC/DELHI/07.11.2007