Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana vs Surjeet Singh And Another on 2 December, 2011
Author: Rakesh Kumar Garg
Bench: Rakesh Kumar Garg
Cross-objection No.105-CI of 2011 and 1
RFA No. 590 of 2001
IN THE HIGH COURTOF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH.
Cross-Objections No.105-CI of 2011 and
RFA No.590 of 2001
Date of decision:2.12.2011
State of Haryana
...Appellant
vs
Surjeet Singh and another
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG.
---
Present: Mr.Aman Deep Dingh AAG Haryana, for the
appellant
Mr.Bhag Singh, Advocate, for the
Cross objectors-respondents.
--
Rakesh Kumar Garg,J.(Oral
The landowners have filed the instant cross-objections in RFA No.590 of 2001 which has been filed by the State of Haryana challenging the award dated 28.1.1999 of the Reference Court, Ambala, In LAC No.764 of 1996/98 (Surjit Singh versus State of Haryana).
Vide these cross-objections, the applicants are claiming a higher rate of compensation i.e. @ Rs.1500/- per sq.yard. It has been further mentioned in these cross-objections that the cross-objections are being filed from the date of knowledge of the appeal filed on behalf of the State of Haryana.
Further effort has been made by the applicants to bring the cross-objections within limitation by stating that earlier they had filed CWP No.1219 of 1992 challenging the notification dated 8.2.1989 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the 'Act') which was Cross-objection No.105-CI of 2011 and 2 RFA No. 590 of 2001 followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act dated 7.2.1990 before this Court and the said writ petition was allowed on 23.7.1993 and the notification issued under Section 6 of the Act dated 7.2.1990 qua the land of the petitioners was quashed. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, the award was passed by the LAO and later on, the fresh notifications were issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act on 10.11.2001 and 8.11.2001 for the land for which the acquisition proceedings were quashed by this Court vide judgment dated 23.7.1993 but the Khasra Nos.27//3/2/2, 27//3/2/1/2 and 19//23/2/2, were not acquired and they were under the impression that their land was not acquired, and it was only in the year 2009 when the State of Haryana wanted to construct the road in the land of the applicant-appellants, it was found that Khasra Nos. 27//3/2/2, 27//3/2/1/2 and 19//23/2/2 were inadvertently not mentioned which were also acquired.
The stand taken by the petitioner is absolutely incorrect and contrary to the record . The cross-objections are sought to be filed in the award of the Reference Court dated 28.1.1999 which is based on the acquisition proceedings initiated vide notification dated 8.2.1989 and 7.2.1990 whereas it is the case of the applicant himself that they had filed CWP No.1219 of 1992 challenging the said notifications and their writ petition was allowed and notification dated 7.2.1990 was quashed vide judgment dated 23.7.1993, but during the pendency of writ petition Land Acquisition Officer had passed an award dated 23.1.1992 against which the applicants filed objections under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which culminated into award dated 28.1.1999. It is also a matter of record that in the reference application filed by the applicant all the khasra numbers of their land (including the above referred khasra numbers) finds Cross-objection No.105-CI of 2011 and 3 RFA No. 590 of 2001 mentioned. Not only this, in the award of the Land Acquisition Officer dated 23.1.1992 only khasra number 27/27/1 belonging to the applicant has been shown to be acquired, thus falsifying the whole explanation as put- forth before this Court to justify the filing of cross-objection in RFA No.590 of 2001 which has arisen out of award dated 28.1.1999 of the Reference Court.
It is well settled that a litigant who comes to the Court on the basis of false plea is not entitled to any relief.
Thus, The cross-objections filed on behalf of the claimants are dismissed.
December 2, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) ps/rk JUDGE