Delhi High Court
Smt. Krishna Devi & Ors. Thru Lrs. vs Union Of India on 8 February, 2011
Author: P.K. Bhasin
Bench: P.K.Bhasin
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ RFA No. 303 of 1988
% Date of Decision: 8th February, 2011
! SMT. KRISHNA DEVI & ORS. THR. LRs. ....Appellants
Through: Mr. Inder Singh, Advocate
versus
$ UNION OF INDIA ...Respondent
^ Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Advocate
CORAM:
* HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
the Judgment?(No)
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? (No)
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?(No)
JUDGMENT
P.K.BHASIN, J(ORAL) By way of this appeal the appellants were challenging the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge rendered on 13th August, 1987 in LAC No. 480 of 1967 whereby the appellants were denied enhancement in compensation to their satisfaction in respect of their land in Mohammad Pur, Munirka which stood acquired by the Government pursuant to notification under Section 4 of the Land RFA No. 303/1988 Page 1 of 7 Acquisition Act issued on 13th November, 1959 and notification under Section 6 dated 16th December, 1965 and Award No. 1939 rendered by Land Acquisition Collector and also the denial of interest for the period from 16-04-70 to 04-03-82.
2. The land in village Mohammad Pur, Munirka was assessed at different rates by the Land Acquisition Collector. When a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was got made by the land owners for seeking enhancement in compensation the Reference Court vide impugned judgment fixed the market value at the flat rate of Rs. 10,000/- per bigha. While giving that enhancement the learned Reference Court had relied upon a decision of a Division Bench of this Court in RFA 280/80 decided on 8th April, 1987 where the market value of the land in village Mohammad Pur, Munirka fixed @ Rs. 10,000/- per bigha in respect of the earlier notification of the year 1957 was adopted even for the notification in respect of the lands in question issued in the year 1959.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants had submitted that the decision of this Court relied upon by the Reference Court was given on a RFA No. 303/1988 Page 2 of 7 statement having been made by the counsel for the land owner in that case to the effect that he was satisfied with the market value of Rs. 10,000/- per bigha as had been fixed in respect of earlier notification of 1957 and, therefore, that decision cannot be said to have determined the market value of the land in question which was sought to be acquired in the year 1959. Learned counsel further submitted that in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in "Bedi Ram vs. Union of India & Anr.", 93 (2001) DLT 150 the appellants are entitled to increase in the market value @ 6% per annum from the date of issuance of the earlier notification, i.e. 8th March, 1957 till the issuance of the notification under Section 4 in the present case which was dated 13th November, 1959 and if that increase is given the market value of the land in question would work out to Rs. 11,686/- as on 13th November, 1959. As far as the applicability of the decision of this Court in Bedi Ram's case(supra) is concerned learned counsel for Union of India very fairly submitted that now that judgment holds the field and is being followed by this Court while considering the question of fixation of market value of lands acquired in earlier years while determining the market value in the subsequent years in respect of the same village and, therefore, he did not contest the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants that they RFA No. 303/1988 Page 3 of 7 are entitled to 6% increase in the market value in view of the decision of this Court in Bedi Ram's case.
4. In these circumstances, this Court is also of the view that the appellants should be given increase @ 6% per annum over and above the market value fixed at Rs. 10,000/- per bigha in respect of the earlier notification dated 8th March, 1957 and consequently the market value of the appellants' land would stand fixed at Rs. 11, 686/- per bigha upon which amount now they shall also be entitled to the statutory benefits but excluding the benefit under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act which position even learned counsel for the appellants also has accepted. The appellants shall also be entitled to the benefit of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Sunder vs. Union of India" reported as 93(2001) DLT 569 which position learned counsel for the respondent - Union of India has also accepted.
5. Now the question which remains to be decided is about the denial of interest to the appellants on the enhanced compensation by the Reference Court. The reference proceedings were stayed sine die on the request of the appellants because of their pendency of writ petition in this RFA No. 303/1988 Page 4 of 7 Court in which they had challenged the very initiation of acquisition proceedings. There was no opposition to the stay of the reference proceedings on behalf of Union of India at that time, as is evident from a perusal of the Reference Court's records. That writ petition came to be dismissed on 16th April, 1970. However, thereafter the appellants did not get their reference revived for many years and finally they woke up in the year 1979 when an application for revival of the reference came to be moved by them on 12th November, 1979. That application also came to be dismissed in default and the same was restored on 4 th March, 1982. The learned Reference Court rejected payment of interest for the period from 16th April, 1970, when the writ petition of the appellants had been rejected, to 4th March, 1982. During the course of hearing of the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that he was not pressing his claim of interest for the period from 16th April, 1970 to 12th November, 1979 when application for revival of the reference proceedings was moved and was now confining his claim of interest for the period from 13th November, 1979 to 4th March, 1982. Responding to this statement of learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Sanjay Poddar submitted that since the appellants are giving up their claim of interest on the enhanced compensation for the period from 16th April, 1970 to 12th RFA No. 303/1988 Page 5 of 7 November, 1979 he has no objection if they are granted interest for the subsequent period to which they would be entitled in view of the Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Chander vs. Union of India and Another" , reported as 2005VII AD (DELHI) 125 and that would also put an end to this long pending litigation.
6. In view of the afore-said, this appeal is allowed partly by enhancing the market value of the land in question to Rs. 11,686/- per bigha and also granting the appellants interest for the period from 13 th November, 1979 to 4th March, 1982 on the enhanced compensation upon which, as observed already, they shall also be entitled to the other statutory benefits except the one which has been specifically excluded, i.e. the benefit under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act. It is further clarified that during the pendency of the present appeal vide order dated 19th November, 2009 statements had been made on behalf of some of LRs of the deceased appellants no. 11, 13 and 1(d) that they shall not be claiming interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of delay which had occurred for their being brought on record and accepting their undertaking to that effect their applications under Order XXII Rules 3 and 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure were allowed. Therefore, the RFA No. 303/1988 Page 6 of 7 LRs of the afore-said three appellants shall not be entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation awarded by this Court vide present judgment for the period from 13th November, 1979 to 4th March, 1982.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, parties are left to bear their respective costs.
P.K. BHASIN,J FEBRUARY 08, 2011 sh RFA No. 303/1988 Page 7 of 7