Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Ravi Dutt Sharma (D) By Lrs vs State Of Haryana . on 25 April, 2017
Bench: Arun Mishra, Amitava Roy, Sanjay Kishan Kaul
1
ITEM NO.104 COURT NO.11 SECTION IV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Civil Appeal No(s). 1925/2008
RAVI DUTT SHARMA (D) BY LRS & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for clarification/modification of court's order
and office report)
WITH
C.A. No. 1989/2008
(With Office Report)
Date : 25/04/2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MISHRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
For the parties:
Mr. Kailash Vasdev, Sr. Adv.
Mr. M.K. Kasana, Adv.
Mr. S.K. Dhingra, Adv.
Ms. Aparna Rohatgi Jain, Adv.
For state of Haryana Ms. Nidhi Gupta, AAG
Mr. Devender Kumar Saini, AAG
Dr. Monika Gusain, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen,Adv.
Mr. Naresh Kaushik, Adv.
Mr. Manoj Joshi, Adv.
Mrs Lalita Kaushik,Adv.
Applicant in
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Manjit Singh, Sr. Adv.
Digitally signed by
I.A. No.9
NEELAM GULATI
Date: 2017.04.29
Mr. Suhaas Ratna Joshi,Adv.
Mr. Suhas Ratna Joshi, Adv.
12:11:53 IST
Reason:
2
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
In C.A. No. 1925 of 2008
Appeal is allowed in part to the extent indicated in the signed order.
In C.A. No. 1989 of 2008
Appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous in terms of the signed order.
(NEELAM GULATI) (TAPAN KR. CHAKRABORTY)
COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file) 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No(s). 1925 OF 2008 RAVI DUTT SHARMA (D) BY LRS & ORS. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondent(s) with CIVIL APPEAL No(s). 1989 OF 2008 O R D E R IN C.A. No. 1925 of 2008 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The appeal has been preferred by the claimants for enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by a sum of Rs. 31.28/- per sq. yard as determined by the High Court.
It is not in dispute that the land of several villages was acquired in the year 1980. The notification for acquisition was also issued in the instant case in the year 1980 for the village Silokhra. For the village Sarhaul, compensation has been determined by the High Court in another matter at 2 Rs.52.50/- per sq. yard which is nearby village and is situated approximately 6 to 7 k.ms. away from the land in question i.e. village Silokhra situated on Gurgaon Delhi Road. Though the High Court had referred to the other decision but had determined the compensation in the case at the rate of Rs.31.28/- per sq. yard in the instant case though in the other case for the village Sarhaul, the compensation had been determined at the rate of Rs.52.50/- per sq. yard.
After hearing learned counsel and considering the potentiality of the land and also the determination made by the High Court with respect to village Sarhaul and considering its decision for the village in question i.e. Silokhra and situation of land, it would be appropriate to determine the compensation at the rate of Rs.42/- per sq. yard instead of Rs.31.28/- as determined by the High Court in view of the decision annexed at P-3 in LPA No. 1905 of 1989 decided by the High Court vide judgment and order dated 4th July, 1995 for the village Sarhaul.
The appeal is allowed in part to the aforesaid extent. The permissible statutory benefit to the appellant shall also follow.
3C.A. No. 1989 of 2008
As is submitted by learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant that the instant appeal has become infructuous. Consequently the appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous.
...............J. (ARUN MISHRA) ...............J. (AMITAVA ROY) ...............J. (SANJAY KISHAN KAUL) NEW DELHI;
APRIL 25, 2017