Full Text
LA.APP.24/2009
RAJ SINGH Sl ORS.
Through:
Appellant
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashlsh Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
CHOTU & ANR.
Through:
UOI & ANR.
Through:
SHRI BRAHMA
Through:
Appellants
Mr.Ashlsh Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
Appellant
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashlsh Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
Page 1 of8 2015:DHC:10545 U\.APP.36/2009 RISHI RAJ RANA & ANR.
Through:
UOI & ANR.
Through:
M.P.GUPTA
Through:
UOI & ANR.
Through:
RAGHUBIR SINGH
Through:
UOI & ANR.
Through:
Appellants
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
Appellant
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
Appellant
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
BHULLAN @ BHULE & ANR.
Through:
Appellants Page 2 of8 2015:DHC:10545 UOI & ANR.
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
M.P.GUPTA & SONS
Through:
Through:
.Appellants Respondents Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI, Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna
Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
MEHAR SINGH & ORS.
Through:
.Appellants
Through:
SANJEEV TUSHIR
Through:
Respondents Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna
Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
.Appellants Page 3 of8 2015:DHC:10545
Through:
JAI NARAYAN & ORS
Through:
Through:
LAKH I RAM
Through:
Through:
GURDEV SINGH
Through:
Respondents Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
.Appellants Respondents Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
.Appellant Respondents Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
.Appellant Page 4 of8 2015:DHC:10545
Through;
Respondents Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI, Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna
Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
RAJ SINGH (D) THRU LRS
Through:
.Appellants
Through:
NISHA GUPTA
Through:
Through:
RATTAN SINGH
Through:
Respondents Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI, Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna
Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
.Appellant Respondents Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI, Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna
Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
Appellant Mr.Kuldeep Balhara, Advocate and Mr.Mukesh Gupta, Advocate.
Page 5 of8 2015:DHC:10545
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI, Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna
Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
CHARAN SINGH & ORS. Appellants
Through: Mr.Kuldeep Balhara, Advocate and Mr.Mukesh Gupta, Advocate.
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
RAGHUBIR SINGH
Through:
Appellant Mr.Kuldeep Balhara, Advocate and Mr.Mukesh Gupta, Advocate.
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
ANGOORI & ORS.
Through:
Appellants Mr.Kuldeep Balhara, Advocate and Mr.Mukesh Gupta, Advocate.
2015:DHC:10545
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
HEM CHANDER SHARMA DECD.
THR LRs Appellant
Through: Mr.Kuldeep Balhara, Advocate and Mr.Mukesh Gupta, Advocate.
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate, Mr.Ramesh Ray, Advocate and
Mr.Ashish Tanwar, Advocate for UOI.
Ms.lndrani Ghosh and Ms.Shobhna Takiar, Advocate for DDA.
02.06.2011
ORDER
1. The instant appeals pertain to lands situated in the revenue estate of village Ghevra, and the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 with which I am concerned was issued on 6.2.2003.
2. The Reference Court has assessed the compensation @ n,18,367/- besides other statutory benefits as per the Land Acquisition Act 1894.
3. Deciding a batch of appeals lead matter being LA.APP Page 7 of[8] 2015:DHC:10545 No.489/2008 Chiranii La! Vs. UP! & Anr. today itself, with reference to a decision dated 19.12.2008 passed by a Division Bench deciding LA.APP.No.193/2006 Pratao Singh (through LRs) 1/5. UP! & Ors. I have determined the fair market value of the lands in village Ghevra at ?4,03,425/- per bigha as of 6.2.2003.
4. The appeals stand disposed of decreeing the same enhancing the compensation payable to the appellants @^4,03,425/- per bigha; additionally decreed that the appellants would be entitled to the statutory benefits as per the Land Acquisition Act 1894 including the decision of the Supreme Court reported as 93 (2001) DLT 569 Sunder Vs. Union ofIndia.
5. The appellants would also be entitled to proportionate costs.
6. Pending applications, if any, in the appeals stand disposed of in terms of the prayer made in the application.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. June 2, 2011 dk Jr NO Ch • • Page 8 of[8] $-1. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LA.APP. 34/2009 SHRI BRAHMA Appellant Through: Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Proxy Counsel % UOI & ANR.
VERSUS
JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI ORDER 27.07.2015 C.M. No.12711/2015 The lawyers are abstaining from work today. The detailedreport has been furnished by the SJA-RFA branch, which has been perused. It appears that the reference court awarded compensation @Rs.1,18,367/- per bigha ofland, which was enhanced to Rs.4,03,425/- per bigha by this court vide judgment dated 02.06.2011. Thus, there was an enhancement of Rs.2,85,058/- per bigha of land. Computed onthatbasis for the land in question, the court fee was found to be deficientby Rs.46,199.97. However, it appears that thejAaartiADJ corrected the clerical error in its judgment and the corrected figure of the compensation awarded by the learned ADJ was Rs.3,99,674 per bigha. Thus, the enhancement by this court was reduced substantially due to the diminishing of the gap. The branch has reported that ifbase rate awarded by the reference court is taken as Rs.3,99,674/- per bigha, then there would be no deficiency ofcourt fee. It is also pointed out that in other similar cases decided by the reference court at the same time, decree sheets have been prepared taking into account the aforesaid development. In view of the aforesaid position, the application is allowed. The registry is directedto preparethe decree sheet in this case as well as in other pending appeals which has been disposed of by common judgment ofthis court dated 02.06.2011 enhancing the compensation to Rs.4,03,425/- on the basis thatthe compensation awarded bythe learned ADJ/reference court was Rs.3,99,674/- per bighaaftercorrection and not Rs.1,18,367/-. Application stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. JULY 27, 2015 sr VIPIN SANGHI, J