Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sub Division Officer (Civil)-Cum-Land ... vs Harbhagwant Singh on 28 November, 2016
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA RFA No.111 of 2009 along with RFAs No. 304, 307, 308, 337, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350, 351 .
and 352 of 2011 Reserved on: 17th November, 2016.
RFA No. 358 of 2011 along with RFAs No. 359, 360, 361, 362, 363 and 364 of 2011.
of Reserved on: 18th November, 2016.
Decided on : 28th November, 2016.
rt
1. RFA No. 111 of 2009.
Sub Division Officer (Civil)-cum-Land Acquisition Collector.
.....Appellant.
Versus Harbhagwant Singh ...Respondent.
2. RFA No. 304 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus Purshotam Chand ....Respondent.
3. RFA No. 307 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Pritam Chand ...Respondent.
4. RFA No. 308 of 2011.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP
...2...
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
.
Versus
...Respondents.
5. RFA No. 337 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
of
Versus
Dhian Singh & Others.
...Respondents.
6. RFA No. 344 of 2011.
rt
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Soma Devi ...Respondent.
7. RFA No. 345 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Desh Raj ...Respondent.
8. RFA No. 346 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Mulakh Raj ...Respondent.
9. RFA No. 347 of 2011.
State of H.P. .....Appellants.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP
...3...
Versus
.
Subhash Chand and others ...Respondents.
10. RFA No. 348 of 2011.
State of H.P. and another .....Appellants.
Versus
of
Kartar Singh ...Respondent.
11. RFA No. 349 of 2011.
State of H.P. and another .....Appellants.
rt
Versus
Kishan Chand and others ...Respondents.
12. RFA No. 350 of 2011.
State of H.P. & others .....Appellants.
Versus
Sandhya Devi ...Respondent.
13. RFA No. 351 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Sawrup Singh ...Respondent.
14. RFA No. 352 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP
...4...
Versus
.
Gian Chand ...Respondent.
15. RFA No. 358 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
of
Ashok Kumar & others ...Respondents.
16. RFA No. 359 of 2011.
rt
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Dittu alias Ratto (since deceased) through his legal
representatives and others ...Respondents.
16. RFA No. 360 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Sandeep Kumar ...Respondent.
17. RFA No. 361 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Nand Lal ...Respondent.
18. RFA No. 362 of 2011.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP
...5...
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
.
Versus
Asha Devi ...Respondent.
19. RFA No. 363 of 2011.
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
of
Versus
Nikki Devi ...Respondent.
20. RFA No. 364 of 2011.
rt
State of H.P. & another .....Appellants.
Versus
Ishwar Dass ...Respondent.
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes For the Appellant (s): Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Deputy Advocate General.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Mohan Sharma,
Advocate.
For the applicants in CMP No. 9535 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP...6...
of 2016 in RFA No.352 of 2011 : Mr. Sanjay Jaswal, Advocate.
.
Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
All the aforesaid appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment as they all pertain to lands which stood of acquired under a notification common each of them besides thereupon the Land Acquisition Collector pronounced a common award.
rt
2. Under the impugned awards recorded by the learned Reference Court(s), the latter assessed compensation qua the lands of the landowners @ Rs.750/- per square meter, whereupon, the compensation amount assessed qua the lands of the landowners by the Land Acquisition Collector suffered a steep hike. The State of Himachal Pradesh, standing aggrieved by the impugned awards of the learned Reference Court whereupon it for begetting their reversal has instituted herebefore the instant appeal(s).
3. RFA No. 358 of 2011 stands directed against the impugned award rendered on 22.5.2010 in RBT Ref. Case No. 28-K/05/03 by the learned Reference Court whereby it on the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...7...
anvil of previous awards comprised in Ex.PW1/B and in Ex. C-
.
1 has qua lands of the respondents concerned herein assessed compensation amount at par with the compensation amount determined qua the lands of the landowners in RBT of Ref. Case No.47-K/05/03, wherefrom RFA No. 352 of 2011 has arisen.
4. The lands of the landowners were brought to rt acquisition for the purpose of extension of Air Port at Gaggal.
In respect of the lands of the landowners as stood brought to acquisition, the Land Acquisition Collector, on anvil of the annual average market price of lands prevailing in the mohal concerned at the stage contemporaneous to the issuance of the apposite notification had thereupon, assessed compensation qua the lands brought to acquisition. The landowners standing aggrieved by the relevant pronouncement of the Land Acquisition Collector, had therefrom preferred reference petitions before the learned Reference Court whereupon the latter proceeded to pronounce the relevant awards impugned hereat.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP...8...
5. The learned Reference Court while pronouncing its .
rendition in RBT Ref. Case No. 55-K/2003, (pronouncement whereof stood relied upon by the learned Reference Court concerned in making its pronouncement in RBT Ref. Case of No. 47-K/05/03) wherefrom RFA No. 111 of 2009 has arisen had computed compensation qua the lands of the landowner(s) by placing reliance upon sale exemplar rt comprised in Ex.PW3/A. For reliance thereupon by the learned Reference Court to hold a sanctified aura of validity, it was incumbent upon the learned Reference Court to ensure qua existence therebefore of evidence pronouncing qua satiation standing begotten qua the twin legal parameters (a) proximity in location angle occurring inter se the lands/land comprised in sale exemplar Ex.PW3/A vis-a-vis the lands of the landowners as stood brought to acquisition and (b) The execution of Ex.PW3/A holding proximity in time angle vis-a-
vis the issuance of an apposite notification for bringing to acquisition the lands of the landowners.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP...9...
6. At the outset, it is imperative to determine from .
the evidence as exists herebefore qua satiation standing begotten qua the enshrined parameter qua proximity in time angle occurring inter se issuance of the apposite notification of under the Act whereupon the lands of the landowners stood brought to acquisition vis-a-vis the execution of Ex.PW3/A, whereupon, reliance as stood placed thereupon would hold rt tenacity. The principle of proximity in time occurring inter se execution of Ex.PW3/A vis-a-vis the issuance of the apposite notification whereupon the land/lands of the landowners stood brought to acquisition would stand satiated on Ex.PW3/A standing provenly executed in close proximity preceding the issuance of a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) or its execution occurring in contemporaneity vis-a-vis the issuance of the apposite notification under the Act whereupon the lands of the landowners stood brought to acquisition.
However, hereat the execution of the sale exemplar embodied in Ex.PW3/A occurred on 3.11.2000 whereas the apposite ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...10...
notification under the Act whereupon the lands of the .
landowners stood brought to acquisition, stood prior thereto issued on 28.6.1999. However, the mere factum qua the occurrence of execution of Ex.PW3/A taking place subsequent of to the issuance of the apposite notification under the Act, would not dispel its sanctity nor thereupon the learned Reference Court would stand faulted in placing reliance rt thereupon unless as mandated in a verdict recorded by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in A. Natesam Pillai versus Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Tiruchy, (2010)9 SCC 118, the relevant paragraph No.13 whereof stands extracted hereinafter, unflinching evidence stood adduced before the learned Reference Court in portrayal of the market value borne by the lands occurring in proximity to the location of the land(s) which stood brought to acquisition earlier thereto besides thereupto its execution remaining unfluctuated besides stable also evidence standing adduced qua their occurring no apparent upsurgings or hikes in the market value of the apposite lands borne on the apposite post ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...11...
notification executed sale exemplar since the issuance of the .
apposite notification under the Act upto the execution of the sale exemplar comprised in Ex.PW3/A. However, with a portrayal standing embodied in Ex.PW3/A qua the value of the of lands depicted therein standing constituted in a sum of Rs.45,000/- per kanal at a stage subsequent to the issuance of the apposite notification under Section 4 of the Act rt whereas with PW2 Vinod Kumar in his testification communicating therein qua the land(s) brought to acquisition holding a value Rs. 5 to 6 lacs per kanal whereupon obviously an evident steep hike since the issuance of the apposite notification under Section 4 of the Act vis-a-vis the occurrence of execution of a sale exemplar embodied in Ex.PW3/A, stands evidently evinced. Accentuated vigour to the inference aforesaid qua since in close contemporaneity to the issuance of the apposite notifucation under the Act whereunder the lands of the landowners stood brought to acquisition upto the stage of post notification executed sale exemplar comprised in Ex.PW3/A, the market value of lands occurring in ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...12...
close proximity vis-a-vis the lands of the landowners noticing .
fluctuations besides escalations stands galvanized from the testification of RW-1, who has therein unveiled qua in close contemporaneity to the issuance of the apposite notification, of the market value borne by the lands in the mohal concerned standing constituted in a sum of Rs.14,974/- per kanal, whereas, with the market value of land comprised in rt Ex.PW3/A pronouncing therewithin qua its sale consideration standing constituted in a sum of Rs.45,000/- per kanal, is a loud besides an apparent disclosure qua the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court qua any reliance placed upon Ex.PW3/A being unbereft of any stain of vitiation unless evidence stands adduced in portrayal of the market value of the relevant lands at the stage contemporaneous to the issuance of the apposite notification upto the execution of the post notification executed sale exemplar comprised in Ex.PW3/A not unraveling fluctuations or escalations since therefrom upto the execution of Ex.PW3/A, whereas, with hereat stark noticeable fluctuations besides steep hikes in the value of the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...13...
relevant lands since the stage contemporaneous to the .
issuance of the apposite notification upto the execution of Ex.PW3/A are vividly apparent thereupon the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court for reliance being placed upon a post of notification executed sale exemplar comprised in Ex.PW3/A stands infracted, rendering reliance placed thereupon by the Reference Court to hold no vigour. Necessarily when rt reiteratedly the market value of the relevant lands located in proximity to the lands brought to acquisition display a visible escalation contrarily when there was a surging ahead of the market value of lands occurring in proximity to the land(s) brought to acquisition, the principle envisaged in the relevant paragraph of the aforesaid citation qua a post notification executed sale exemplar being amenable for reliance being placed thereupon only on evidence surging forth in personification qua the market value of lands prevailing in the locality whereat the lands of the landowners brought to acquisition stood located at the time contemporaneous to the issuance of the apposite notification or in close preceding ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...14...
proximity prior thereof remaining upto the occurrence of .
execution of Ex.PW3/A stable besides unfluctuated, hence, standing visibly transgressed. Moreover, infraction of the principle encapsulated in the aforesaid citation qua a post of notification executed sale exemplar holding probative sinew for reliance being placed thereupon for determining compensation amount qua the apposite lands as stood prior rt thereto subjected to initiation of acquisition proceedings in respect thereof, on eruption of evidence qua since the issuance of the apposite notification upto the execution of the apposite post notification executed sale exemplar there occurring no visible steep hike in the value of lands located in proximity to the relevant lands, stands also reiteratedly triggered, by the factum of RW-1 testifying qua the five year average market value of the lands located in proximity to the lands of the landowners as stood brought to acquisition at the stage contemporaneous to the issuance of the apposite notification standing detected to be in a sum of Rs.14,974/-
per kanal whereas with the relevant apposite post notification ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...15...
executed sale exemplar comprised in Ex.PW3/A depicting .
therewithin the market value of the land borne thereon to hold a value of Rs.45000/- per kanal does hold a stark display qua the prices of the relevant lands prior to or at the stage of contemporaneous to the issuance of the apposite notification under the Act upto the execution of Ex.PW3/A noticing a steep hike rather than there occurring no apposite rt fluctuations since the issuance of the apposite notification under Section 4 of the Act upto the execution of Ex.PW3/A, whereupon imputation of reliance upon the apposite post notification executed sale exemplar Ex.PW3/A, is bereft of sanctity. Paragraph No.13 of the aforereferred verdict of the Hon'ble Apex Court reads as under:-
"This Court in Administrator General of W.B. v.
Collector, Varanasi (1988)2 SCC 150 has held:
"13. ....Such subsequent transactions which are not proximate in point of time to the acquisition can be taken into account for purposes of determining whether as on the date of acquisition there was an upward trend in the prices of land in the ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...16...
area. Further under certain circumstances .
where it is shown that the market was stable and there were no fluctuations in the prices between the date of the preliminary notification and the date of of such susbequent transaction, the transaction could also be relied upon to ascertain the market value. This Court in rt State of U.P. v. Major Jitendera Kumar, (19082)2 SCC 382 observed:
"3..... It is true that the sale deed, Ex. 21 upon which the High Court has relied is of a date three years later than the notification under Section 4 but no material was produced before the court to suggest that there was any fluctuation in the market rate at Meerut from 1948 onwards till 1951 and if so to what extent.
In the absence of any material showing any fluctuation in the market rate the High Court thought it fit to rely upon Ext. 21 under which the Housing Society itself had purchased land in the neighbourhood of the land in dispute. On the whole we are ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...17...
not satisfied that any error was committed .
by the High Court in relying upon the sale deed, Ext. 21."
But this Principle could be appealed to only where there is evidence to the effect that there was no of upward surge in the prices in the interregnum. The burden of establishing this would be squarely on the party relying on such subsequent transaction."
rt (emphasis supplied). "
....(p.122).
7. The further effect of the landowners not adducing evidence within the ambit of the aforesaid exception to the normal rule qua an apposite post notification executed sale exemplar not warranting imputation of reliance thereupon, is qua also an inference standing erected qua the apposite;y executed post notification sale exemplar holding a vice of rigidness also the sale consideration embodied therein being unamenable for any apposite reliance standing placed thereon, significantly, when it stood evidently executed with the executants thereto while perceiving the impending launching of acquisition proceedings qua lands occurring in ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...18...
proximity thereof, theirs inflating the sale consideration .
pronounced therein merely for begetting qua the lands of the landowners determination of an unfair and unjust compensation amount. In formulating the aforesaid of expostulation of law, this Court is supported by a verdict of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in K. Posayya and others versus Special Tahsildar, (1955)5 SCC 233, relevant rt paragraph No.4 whereof stands extracted hereinafter:-
"4. The question, therefore, is what is the correct principle of law to be applied in determining the market value of vast extent of lands acquired for a project. Admittedly, Ex. A-1 dated 31.12.1980 is the torchlight for the claimants to lay higher claim. It is a post notification sale of the land situated in Chakrdevrapalli. According tot he claimants, it is situated at a distance of 3 to 4 kms from Village Alivelu. According to Land Acquisition Officer, the distance between the two villages is 30 kms.
Possession of these lands admittedly was taken between 15.4.1977 i.e. prior to the notification under Section 4(1) and 14.7.1980, shortly after the notification under Section 4 (1). It would, thus, be clear that the sale deed was brought into existence after the notification and possession was taken of the lands. This is the notorious document relied in all the subsequent references. Only the attestor was ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...19...
examined in proof of the documents. It would be .
obvious that it was a brought-up document to inflate the market value of the lands under acquisition not only in this village but in the surrounding villages. The High Court, therefore, was right in rejecting the said document and refusing to place reliance for determination of the compensation, Exhibit !-2, of judgment of the Single Judge of the High Court in AS No. 2500 of 1986 arising out of OP No.49 of 1984 of the same reference court. The lands therein were acquired for Vengalrayasagar project. They are the rt wet lands. Since the counsel for the Government did not appear and no material was placed on record and since in earlier cases, award was confirmed for a sum of Rs.22,000 per acre, the Single Judge enhanced the compensation to Rs.22,000. That is obviously an illegal approach adopted by the High Court in determining the market value of project area i.e. large tracts of lands covered by the project. It would appear that the other references were not brought to the notice of the learned Judges. Therefore, it cannot be formed the basis to fix the market value at higher rate, though the judgment may be wrong."
...(p.236)
8. Be that as it may, the non existence at the apposite stage of sale exemplar(s) executed prior to or in contemporaneity to the issuance of the apposite notification under the Act whereupon alone the learned Reference Court held the requisite facilitation for its thereupon assessing a ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...20...
just, reasonable and fair compensation amount vis-a-vis the .
lands of landowners, was not a sufficient factor for it to rely upon a legally frail Ex.PW3/A rather it was enjoined to mete reverence to the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, who of while determining compensation amount qua the lands of the landowners meted deference to the apposite market value as stood approved by the District Collector concerned.
rt
9. The learned Senor Counsel appearing for the respondents herein has concerted to validate the verdicts recorded by the Reference Court by making an espousal qua with the learned Reference Court meteing 50% deduction from the value of the land borne in Ex.PW3/A, renders the apposite verdicts recorded on the land reference petitions constituted therebefore by the landowners to fall within the ambit of the principle enshrined by this Court in a decision reported in Bhakra Beas Management Board & Anr.
Versus State of H.P. & others, Latest HLJ 2003(H)) 1202 wherein this Court has proceeded to mere 40% deduction qua the value of the land(s) borne on the sale exemplar existing ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...21...
therebefore, wherefrom this Court assessed compensation .
qua the lands of the landowners, arrayed as respondents therein. The pronouncement recorded by this Court in the aforereferred case would hold vigour only when Ex. Px which of existed therebefore as a recoknable sale exemplar for assessment of compensation qua the lands of the landowners therein alike Ex.PW3/A embodying therein a post notification rt executed sale exemplar. However, an incisive, close circumspect reading of the pronouncement relied upon by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respondents herein unveils qua Ex. Px which constituted therebefore the relevant sale exemplar standing executed six year's prior to the issuance of the apposite notification under the Act whereunder the lands of the landowners therein stood brought to acquisition. The aforesaid factum per se brings-
forth a visible distinctivity inter se Ex. Px vis-a-vis Ex.PW3/A. Consequently, when thereat Ex. Px stood executed prior to the issuance of the apposite notification under the Act whereas with hereat Ex.PW3/A evidently comprising a post ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...22...
notification executed sale exemplar, thereupon the verdict .
relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents herein does not fall within the ambit of the rule encapsulated in the binding judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court for of thereupon reliance thereon holding any validation.
10. Consequently, with Ex.PW3/A being wholly unreliable rather warranting its standing discarded, the mere rt factum of the learned Reference Court meteing 50% deduction vis-a-vis the price of land comprised therein for thereupon its awarding compensation amount qua the lands of the landowners herein neither falls within the ambit of the ratio propounded in the judgment relied upon by the learned Senior Counsel appearing of the respondents herein nor also thereupon the relevant material pronouncing upon the market value borne by the lands of the landowners at the apposite stage in contemporaneity vis-a-vis the issuance of the apposite notification under the Act depicting therein the relevant reliable approved assessment meted thereto by the District Collector warranted any disimputation of credence as ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...23...
untenably done by the learned Reference Court. Reiteratedly .
when Ex.PW3/A is wholly discardable also when for reasons aforestated reliance thereupon by the learned Senior Counsel when stands hinged on anvil of an evident inapplicable of pronouncement hereat recorded previously by this Court in the afore referred citation renders any reliance thereupon to be grossly untenable, corollary whereof is the mere factum of rt meteing of a 50% deduction from the value of the land borne therein vis-a-vis the lands of the landowners herein for thereupon assessing compensation amount qua the respondents herein would not validate any reliance placed thereupon by the learned Reference Court. The learned Senior Counsel has remained grossly unmindful qua in the citation relied upon by him, this Court has meted a 40% deduction from the value of lands borne in Ex. Px, a pre-
notification executed sale exemplar therein, whereupon it determined the compensation amount therein merely on the anvil of disproportionateness in size of land borne therein vis-
a-vis the size of acquired lands therein, his unmindfulness ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...24...
qua the gravity of the aforestated ratio propounded therein .
has led him to misespouse qua parity emerging in the factual matrix prevailing therein vis-a-vis the factual matrix herein whereupon naturally he mis espouses qua its applicability of hereat.
11. Furthermore, the learned Reference Court has held qua landowners standing entitled to 20% per anum increase rt on the market value assessed on the anvil of Ex.PW3/A by him qua the lands of the landowners, entitlement whereof stands concluded by it commence from 28.6.1999 whereat the apposite notification issued, upto 16.11.2011 whereat the relevant award(s) stood pronounced by it. However, the aforesaid benefit bestowed by the learned Reference Court upon the landowners is ridden with a gross vice of untenability arising from the factum of it bestowing the aforesaid benefit upon the landowners/respondents herein on the anvil of the aforesaid discradable post notification executed sale exemplar embodied in Ex.PW3/A also its thereupon detracting from the trite expostulation of law qua ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...25...
the judicially determined market value of lands prevalent at .
the stage contemporaneous to the issuance of the apposite notification alone constituting the anvil wherefrom the statutory price hike was meteable.
of
12. For the reasons aforestated, the award(s) of the Reference Court suffers from a gross illegality spurring from gross mis-appreciation of the import of Ex.PW3/A besides its rt undermining the impact thereon of the mandate of the verdicts of the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to hereinabove.
Consequently, the instant appeals are allowed and the award(s) rendered by the learned Reference Court are set aside. In sequel, the award(s) of the Land Acquisition Collector is maintained and affirmed.
CMP No. 9535 of 2016 in RFA No.352 of 2011.
13. During the pendency of the aforesaid RFA, CMP No. 9535 of 2016 stands filed herebefore by the applicants, namely, Vipin Kumar, Bhupinder Kumar and Ravinder Kumar claiming therein a relief qua theirs being permitted to be impleaded as party(ies) in the array of respondents, on ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...26...
ground of the impugned rendition assessing compensation .
qua the respondent(s) therein standing constituted in a sum in gross disproportion qua his entitlement thereto, entitlement whereof stands borne in the apposite revenue record.
of However, in the face of an averment standing recorded therein qua Civil Suit bearing No. 56/2014, titled as Bhupinder Kumar & others versus Neeru Ram and others pending before rt the Civil Court concerned for rendition of a decree for declaration, permanent prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction, qua the facet aforesaid, thereupon the relief for impleading of the applicants herein in the apposite array of the parties to the lis hereat also in-consequence to their impleadment any pronouncement thereupon would forestall the Civil Court concerned to record its apposite verdict on the relevant issue(s) raised therebefore. For obviation whereof the application stands dismissed. However, for not prejudicing the rights canvassed in the Civil Suit by the applicants herein, it is directed qua till the Civil Court concerned records its decision in the aforesaid Civil Suit, the compensation ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP ...27...
amount, if any, which remains undisbursed qua the respective .
landowners in RFA No. 352 of 2011 shall not be released in their respective favour.
of (Sureshwar Thakur) 28th November, 2016. Judge.
(jai) rt ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 21:37:56 :::HCHP