Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pohlo Ram & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 9 January, 2017
Author: Arun Palli
Bench: Arun Palli
RFA No.4905 of 2016 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RFA No.4905 of 2016 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 09.01.2017
Pohlo Ram and others
......Appellants
Versus
Union of India and others
...... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN PALLI
Present: Mr. Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellants.
ARUN PALLI J. (Oral)
CM-13707-CI-2016 For the reasons set out in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. Consequently, the appeal is taken on board.
CM-13708-CI-2016 This is an application for condonation of delay of 3302 days in filing the accompanying appeal.
All what has been urged by learned counsel for the applicants is that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the judgment, dated 17.02.2016, rendered by this court in RFA No.2902 of 1999 [Union of India and another v. Major Pritam Singh and another] and other connected cases, vide which in the appeals arising out of the same acquisition, this court had enhanced the compensation uniformly to Rs. 2300/- per marla.
Notice.
Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate, present in court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
The factual position, as set out above, is not disputed by learned counsel for the respondents.
1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 16-01-2017 00:09:03 ::: RFA No.4905 of 2016 (O&M) 2 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
In the wake of the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Imrat Lal and others v. Land Acquisition Collector and others, 2015(2) RCR (Civil) 437 and Dhiraj Singh (D) Tr. LRs. v. Haryana State and others, 2015 (2) RCR (Civil) 507, delay of 3302 days in filing the accompanying appeal is condoned. However, to balance the equities, for the period of delay in filing the appeal the applicants shall not be entitled to any interest on the enhanced compensation.
CM stands disposed of.
CM-13709-CI-2016 For the reasons set out in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Consequently, the LRs of late Balwant Singh son of Guran Ditta, Dharum @ Pannu son of Birju, Swarno Devi @ Sarbani widow of Jalam Singh, Saudagar Singh son of Ghasitu (appellant No.2, 3, 10 and 17), as depicted in para 2 to 5 of the application, are brought on record for the purpose of pursing the present appeal only.
CM-13710-CI-2016 Allowed, as prayed for.
RFA-4905-2016 For, the learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the matter in issue is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this court in Major Pritam Singh's case (supra), the present appeal is disposed of in the same terms. However, the appellants shall not be entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of delay in filing the appeal i.e. 3302 days.
(ARUN PALLI)
JUDGE
Janurary 9, 2017
Rajan/Raman
Whether speaking/ reasoned YES/NO
Whether Reportable: YES/NO
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 16-01-2017 00:09:04 :::