Punjab-Haryana High Court
Imrat Lal And Others vs Land Acquisition Collector And Others on 5 September, 2011
Author: Rakesh Kumar Garg
Bench: Rakesh Kumar Garg
CM No.12357-CI of 2011 and
RFA No.5477 of 2011 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CM No.12357-CI of 2011 and
RFA No.5477 of 2011 (O&M)
Date of decision: 5.9.2011
Imrat Lal and others ......Appellant(s)
Versus
Land Acquisition Collector and others ......Respondent(s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG
* * *
Present: Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the appellant(s).
Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral)
This is claimants' appeal challenging the impugned award of the Reference Court seeking further enhancement in compensation for their acquired land.
It has been stated before this Court that RFA No.1824 of 2006 (Sudama and others versus State of Haryana) decided on 1.10.2010 arising out of same notification for acquisition of land has already been decided by this Court wherein compensation has been enhanced. However, it may be pointed out that there is a delay of 1110 days in filing the instant appeal. The application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the aforesaid delay reads thus:
"1. That the appellants are filing the present appeal to enhance the enhancement of compensation against the order passed by the Ld. ADJ, Gurgaon dated 6.5.2008.
2. That on the grounds taken, there is every likelihood of the appeal being accepted. The appellants and other claimants of the appellant's village conveyed the meeting to file the cases jointly before the Hon'ble CM No.12357-CI of 2011 and RFA No.5477 of 2011 (O&M) 2 High Court. Appellants also gave their brief to other claimants to file the appeal before the Hon'ble High Court. Appellants came to know from the judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court that other claimants did not file case on behalf of the appellants. Appellants contacted to the other claimants to know the status of case and they demanded copy of the order, so that they also can file execution of the order of the Hon'ble High Court. Appellants came to know from the judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court that other claimants did not file case on behalf of the appellants. Therefore, there is a delay of 1110 days in filing the appeal which is due to above mentioned reason. They delay is bonafide and not negligent.
It is, therefore, respectfully prayed, that the present application may kindly be allowed and the delay of 1110 days in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice and equity."
Thus, a perusal of the averments made in this application would show that the appellants had given their brief to other claimants to file an appeal before this Court and they came to know from the judgment of this Court that the other claimants have not filed an appeal on their behalf and in view of the aforesaid fact, the delay of 1110 days has been caused in filing this appeal. The explanation given by the appellants is not believable. So much so, the appellants have not mentioned the names of the other claimants to whom they have entrusted their appeals for filing before this Court. Even otherwise, it is not believable that a villager whose land has been acquired will not enquire about his case from a co-villager through whom the said appeal was filed, allegedly, for such a long period.
The averments made in this application shows that the appellants had been negligent and casual in their approach to file the CM No.12357-CI of 2011 and RFA No.5477 of 2011 (O&M) 3 appeal and they have woken up only when this Court had enhanced the compensation in other appeals. Thus, the explanation given is not accepted.
No sufficient cause to condone the extra ordinary delay has been shown, therefore, prayer for condoning the delay in filing this appeal is rejected.
Since the delay in filing the appeal has not been condoned, the instant appeal is dismissed being time barred.
September 5, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps JUDGE