Full Text
LA.APP. 720/2006
INDRAWATI Appellant
Through: Mr.S.Chaturvdi and Mr.R.S.Dalal, Advocate
LADO DEVI Appellant
Through: Mr.S.Chaturvedi and Mr.R.S.DalaI, Advocates
Through: M r.Sanjay Poddar, Sr.Advocate .
JOGINDER Appellant Mr.R.S.Dalal, Advocates
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Sr.Advocate Advocate for UOI.
2011:DHC:13542
DALEL SINGH Appellant Mr.R.S.D'alal, Advocates
VIRENDER @ RAGHVENDER Appellant
Through: Mr.Deepak Khosla and Mr.S.S.Rana, Advocates
RANDHIR Appel!ant
_r
SANDEEP Appellant
Advocate for UQI. I..A.APP. 175/2010 RAMA NAND Appellant
RAMBIR SINGH Appellant
I
RAMPHAL . Appellant
BALBIR SINGH ..... Appellant
PEHLAD SINGH Appel!ant
Through: Mr.Sanjay, Poddar, Sr.Advocate q- a
RAM RATI (DECEASED) THR. LRS Appellant
• with Mr.Sanjay Pathak, LA.APP. 230/2010
RAJBIR SINGH Appellant
JASWANTSINGH Appellant Mr.S.S.Rana, Advocates.
SATYAVIR SINGH DECD THR LRS ..... Appellant
UNION OF INDIA Appellant for UOl.
Through: Ms.Amita Singh, Advocate for DDA
DEVENDER Appellant
12.08.2011 Above capti9ned appeals and cross objections if any, pertain to acquisition of land in the revenue estate of village Holambi
Khurd which were acquired pursuant to a notification dated
15.11.1996 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Pertaining to the same notification and relating to adjoining village fair market value determined by this Court in the decision reported as 2006 (VI) AD (Delhi) 13 Ga/ra/Sincih Vs.
(JO1 has been held to be 9,76,121/- per acre for category A land for 9,51,121/- per acre for category B land.
ORDER
3. The appeals stand disposed of decreeing that where the Court has awarded the compensation as aforesaid the said appeal would stand dismissed without any orders as to costs and in such appeals where the Reference Court has determined a fair market value less than 9,76,121/- for category Aand 9,51,121/- for category B, the appellants or the cross objectors as the case may be, would be entitled to compensation at the said rate and needless to state on the enhanced compensation statutory benefits as per the Land Acquisition Act 1894 as interpreted in the decision reported as 93 (2001) DLT 569 Sunder vs. (JO, shall be granted. In cases where there is delay in filing the appeal and delay has been condoned, on the enhanced compensation interest would not be paid for the period of delay. Proportionate costs as well. C.M. No.8313/2011 in LA.Aru.No.238/2011 (Stay) • Since the appeal is being heard for final disposal, instant application seeking stay of operation of impugned decree is dismissed. C.M. No.8314/2011 in LA.A.No.238/2011(Delay) For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 70 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
PRADEEP NAN DRAJOG, J. AUGUST 12, 2011 mm