Himachal Pradesh High Court
Muni Lal S/O Sh Parsu vs Muni Lal Alongwith Other Connected on 27 August, 2021
Author: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2021
BEFORE
.
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTSNA REWAL DUA
CIVIL MISC. PETITION MAIN (ORIGINAL No. 170 OF 2021)
Between:-
1. MUNI LAL S/O SH PARSU
2. DHARAM DUTT S/O SH PARSU
BOTH R/O VILL, CHHAJWAR P.O. MALOH,
TEHSIL SUNDER NAGAR, DISTT. MANDI H.P.
.....PETITIONERS
(BY SH. H.S. RANGRA ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR,
COLLECTOR, HPPWD MANDI DISTT. MANDI H.P.
2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER HPPWD
DIVISION SUNDER NAGAR, DISTT MANDI, H.P.
.....RESPONDENTS
(Mr. R.P. Singh and Ms. Seema Sharma,
Deputy Advocates General)
Whether approved for reporting?
__________________________________________________
This petition coming on for orders this day, the
Court passed the following:
ORDER
Petitioners in the year 2021 seek to set aside an award passed by National Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017, on the ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 2 ground that they had not authorized the learned counsel, who had appeared on their behalf before the Lok Adalat.
.
2(i) A bunch of regular first appeals was listed before the National Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017. This bunch included RFA No.174 of 2015 with CO No.131 of 2016 titled the Land Acquisition Collector Vs Muni Lal alongwith other connected regular first appeals.
2(ii) The bunch matters alongwith RFA No.174 of 2015 and CO No.131/2016 was taken up by the National Lok Adalat.
Shri Purinder Sharma, Joint Director, Prosecution (PWD)-cum Member Secretary (Litigation) Monitoring, appeared on behalf of the appellants. His statement recorded by the Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017 was as under:-
"Stated that I have been authorized by the State of Himachal Pradesh-Appellant(s) to withdraw the present appeal(s) in the interest of general public. The appeal(s) are accordingly dismissed as withdrawn as the award passed by the learned District Judge is within the permissible limit. Court fee be refunded to the appellant(s) strictly in accordance with law. The award be passed accordingly. The awarded amount, if not be deposited will be deposited in a month."
Shri Surinder Verma, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the respondents/cross-objectors (present petitioners).
His statement was recorded on oath as under:-
::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 3"I have heard and understood the statement given by Shri Purinder Sharma, Joint Director, Prosecution (PWD)-cum Member Secretary (Litigation) Monitoring, .
Nirman Bhawan, Shimla, H.P. and the same is correct.
As per the instruction given by my clients, the present appeal(s) filed by the State may kindly be dismissed as withdrawn and similarly Cross Objection(s) filed by respondent(s) in some of the case also stand dismissed as withdrawn. I am giving aforesaid statement on behalf of my client(s)."
2(iii) Lok Adalat thereafter proceeded to pass following award on 09.12.2017:-
"Shri Purinder Sharma, Joint Director, Prosecution (PWD)-cum-
Member Secretary (Litigation) Monitoring alongwith Shri Vidya Sagar Sharma, Assistant Engineer, SNP Shahnahar Project, Sub Division Thakurdwara under Division SNP Sansarpur Terrace appeared before us and submitted vide separate statement that the present appeal(s) be dismissed as withdrawn as the award passed by the learned District Judge is within the permissible limit and State has no objection if the appeal(s) be dismissed withdrawn.
2. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent(s) submitted the Cross Objection(s) filed by the respondent(s) be also dismissed as withdrawn and he has no objection if the present Cross Objection(s) is dismissed as withdrawn. Statement(s) of parties have been recorded separately and placed on record.
3. In view of the above submissions, the present appeal(s) and Cross Objection(s) are dismissed as withdrawn. Statements of the parties will form part and parcel of the award. The amount ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 4 awarded by the learned District Judge will be deposited by the appellant(s) if already not deposited, within a month in the Registry of High Court of Himachal Pradesh and the same shall be released .
in favour of the respondent(s) alongwith up-to-date interest in the Payee Account Numbers to be furnished by the respondent(s) within fortnight. The Court fee shall be refunded in favour of the appellant(s) strictly as per rules.
The award is passed accordingly and the appeal(s) alongwith application(s), if any, and Cross Objection(s) stand disposed of.
(Anand Sharma) (D.K. Khenal) (P.S. Rana)
Member Member Chairman"
2(iv) In the instant petition filed by the original
respondents-cross objectors, a prayer has been made for setting aside the award dated 09.12.2017 passed by the Lok Adalat and for restoration of cross-objection No.131/2016 to its original number and for its decision on merits by the Court.
3. Sh. H.S. Rangra, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners had not authorized Shri Surinder Verma, Advocate, to appear and make statement on their behalf before the Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017. The authorized counsel in the RFA No.174/2015 and its connected cross-
objection was Sh. H.S. Rangra, Advocate (counsel in the present petition). Neither Sh. H.S. Rangra, Advocate, nor the present petitioners had authorized Sh. Surinder Verma, ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 5 Advocate, to appear and make statement on their behalf before the Lok Adalat in the case in question. It is also contended that .
the present petitioners were under the bonafide impression that only the appeal filed by the appellants i.e. the Land Acquisition Collector, was dismissed as withdrawn under the award dated 09.12.2017 and that their cross-objection was still pending. It was only on 08.04.2021, when the record of the case was inspected by Sh. H.S Rangra, Advocate, that he became aware of the fact that not only the appeal but the cross-objection preferred by the present petitioners had also been dismissed by the Lok Adalat as withdrawn. On the basis of these assertions, prayer has been made for setting aside the award dated 09.12.2017 to the extent it dismissed as withdrawn the cross-
objection filed by the present petitioners (original respondents in RFA No.174/2015).
Learned Deputy Advocate General defended the award and submitted that the present petitioners (original respondents) had engaged different learned counsels in different proceedings. She further submitted that it is incorrect on part of the petitioners to submit that they had not authorized Shri Surinder Verma, Advocate, to make statement on their behalf before the Lok Adalat.::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 6
4. Certain facts become relevant in order to appreciate the grievance projected by the petitioners.
.
4(i) The award was passed by the Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017 whereby not only the appeal but the cross-objection was also dismissed as withdrawn. The award was passed on the strength of statement made by the representative appearing on behalf of the appellants as well as on the basis of statement made by Shri Surinder Verma, Advocate, on behalf of the present petitioners. Learned counsel for the present petitioners contended that Sh. Surinder Verma, Advocate, was not authorized to appear & make statement on behalf of the present petitioners in the Lok Adalat. Be that as it may.
4(ii) Significantly, subsequent to the award, present petitioners moved CMP No.136/2020 in RFA No.174/2015 under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The prayer in the application was for release of the awarded amount in their favour. In this application, averments were made by the petitioners that the appeal had been finally disposed of vide order dated 09.12.2017 and that they are in the need of money.
Therefore, prayer was made for release of the awarded amount.
Two paragraphs of the application being relevant are extracted hereinafter:-::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 7
"1. That the above titled first appeal against the award passed by the learned Addl. Distt. Judge Mandi, Distt. Mandi has been filed by the non-
.
applicant/appellant before the Hon'ble Court which appeal has been finally disposed of by this Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 09.12.2017.
2. That the non-applicant had preferred the appeal before this Hon'ble High Court and as per the direction of this Hon'ble Court had also deposited the entire amount of compensation in the registry of this Hon'ble Court."
The application was supported with the affidavits of the present petitioners.
4(iii) CMP No.136/2020 was allowed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 10.01.2020 with following order:-
" By way of instant application, a prayer has been made on behalf of the applicants/ respondents for release of the award amount lying deposited in the Registry of this Court. Learned Additional Advocate General, states on behalf of the non-
applicants/appellants that since the award has attained finality, no reply is intended to be filed to the application and he has no objection in case prayer made in the application is accepted.
2. Averments contained in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, clearly reveal that appeal being RFA No.174 of 2015, having been filed by the non-applicant/appellant, laying therein challenge to award dated 27.06.2014, passed by the Additional District Judge-I, Mandi in Reference Petition No.71/2013/2008 alongwith connected ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 8 matters stands compromised before the National Lok Adalat, whereby the appeals as well as applications filed by the parties have been disposed of. Since no .
appeal whatsoever has been preferred by the parties against the award dated 09.12.2017, passed by the National Lok Adalat, as such the same has attained finality.
3. Consequently, in view of the above, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer having been made by the applicants/respondents for release of award amount lying deposited in the Registry of this Court and as such application is allowed and Registry is directed to release the award amount in favour of the applicant, by remitting the same in his saving bank account, details whereof is mentioned in Annexures A-1 and A-2 annexed with the application, subject to verification by the Accounts Branch.
Application stands disposed of."
5. Contents of the above extracted application and perusal of the above order would indicate that the present petitioners were very well aware of the order dated 09.12.2017 passed by the National Lok Adalat. The order dated 09.12.2017 clearly records the fact that not only the appeal but the cross-objection was also dismissed as withdrawn. It was only thereafter that the application for release of the awarded amount was moved by the petitioners on the ground that the matter was finally ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 9 disposed of. It cannot be the case of the present petitioners that there were two separate orders passed on 09.12.2017, .
one dismissing the appeal and the other dismissing their cross-objection. Therefore there is no escape from the conclusion that the petitioners were very well aware of the order dated 09.12.2017 dismissing the appeal as well as their cross-objection as withdrawn. They accordingly moved the application before the Court for release of the awarded amount after disposal of the case by the Lok Adalat on 09.12.2017. In case the present petitioners were aggrieved by the dismissal of their cross-objection then they were required to take appropriate steps in that regard at the relevant time. The moving of application by the petitioners for release of the awarded amount after being aware of the order dated 09.12.2017 clearly indicates that the petitioners had accepted and acquiesced in the award dated 09.12.2017 dismissing not only the appeal but also their cross objection as withdrawn. They cannot be permitted to set up a plea three years later that Shri Surinder Verma, learned counsel, was not authorized by them to appear and make statement on their behalf before the Lok Adalat and ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 10 that for this reason the award be set aside. The order passed by the Coordinate Bench on 10.01.2020 specifically .
records that "........challenge to award dated 27.06.2014, passed by the Additional District Judge-I, Mandi in Reference Petition No.71/2013/2008 alongwith connected matters stands compromised before the National Lok Adalat, whereby the appeals as well as applications filed by the parties have been disposed of. Since no appeal whatsoever has been preferred by the parties against the award dated 09.12.2017, passed by the National Lok Adalat, as such the same has attained finality. 3.
Consequently, in view of the above, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer having been made by the applicants/respondents for release of award amount lying deposited in the Registry of this Court.......". The order was passed in presence of Sh. H.S. Rangra, Advocate, for the present petitioners. The petitioners who were applicants in CMP No.136/2020 were released awarded amount on the basis of the statement made on their behalf that the award dated 9.12.2017 had become final. Therefore, the plea being taken now that the present petitioners were not ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS 11 aware of dismissal of their cross-objection as withdrawn under order dated 09.12.2017 is not borne out from the .
record. Having accepted the award, having acted upon it, the present petitioners are now estopped from challenging it. Hence, the instant petition being totally misconceived and devoid of merit is dismissed. Pending miscellenous applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge August 27, 2021 (rohit) ::: Downloaded on - 31/01/2022 22:58:18 :::CIS