Full Text
Translation output
38.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
LA.APP. 508/2011
KAMLESH KUMARI Appellant
Through: Mr. L.B. Rai, Advocate
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
LA.APP. 508/2011
KAMLESH KUMARI Appellant
Through: Mr. L.B. Rai, Advocate
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Advocate for respondent No.1/UOI.
Mr. Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate for respondent No.2/DDA.
Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Advocate for respondent No.1/UOI.
Mr. Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate for respondent No.2/DDA.
CORAM:
HON 1 BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
03.08.2011
03.08.2011
CM 14297/2011 (for condonation of delay in filing the appeal)
This application is filed by the appellant praying inter a/ia for condonation of delay of 447 days in filing the accompanying appeal.
At the outset, counsel for the appellant states that in case the delay of 447 days in preferring the accompanying appeal is condoned, the appellant shall not claim interest on the enhanced amount for the period of delay as also the costs of the appeal.
Counsel for the respondent No. 1/Union of India and respondent
No. 2/DDA state that they have no objection to the aforesaid suggestion made by the counsel for the appellant.
LA.APP. 50812011 Pagelof4 I 2011:DHC:13630 Accordingly, the present application is allowed with the condition that the appellant shall not be entitled to claim interest on the enhanced amount for the period of delay of 447 days in filing the appeal as also the costs of the appeal.
The application is disposed of.
This application is filed by the appellant praying inter a/ia for condonation of delay of 447 days in filing the accompanying appeal.
At the outset, counsel for the appellant states that in case the delay of 447 days in preferring the accompanying appeal is condoned, the appellant shall not claim interest on the enhanced amount for the period of delay as also the costs of the appeal.
Counsel for the respondent No. 1/Union of India and respondent
No. 2/DDA state that they have no objection to the aforesaid suggestion made by the counsel for the appellant.
LA.APP. 50812011 Pagelof4 I 2011:DHC:13630 Accordingly, the present application is allowed with the condition that the appellant shall not be entitled to claim interest on the enhanced amount for the period of delay of 447 days in filing the appeal as also the costs of the appeal.
The application is disposed of.
LA.APP. 508/2011
By way of the present appeal, the appellant has assailed the
By way of the present appeal, the appellant has assailed the
ORDER
27.01.2010 passed by the Reference Court in LAC
No.133/09 arising out of Award No.3/DC(W)/2005-06 pertaining to village Mundka, pursuant to the notification dated 21.03.2003 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (in short 'the Act').
Counsel for the appellant submits that, the present case is squarely covered by the judgment of a co-ordinate Bench (Pradeep
Nandrajog, J.) passed in a batch of matters, lead matter being
LAAPP.No.784/2005 entitled 'Jamna vs. UOI & Ors.' decided as recently as on 08.07.2011. Learned counsel particularly draws the attention of this Court to the operative para 33 of the aforesaid judgment, relevant portions of which are reproduced herein below:-
"33. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the Union of
India require to be dismissed and I hereby dismiss the same. The appeals filed by the land owners and the cross-objections filed by the land owners stands decreed as under:-
LA.APP. 50812011 PlAr xxx For the land situated in village Mundka the fair market value is fixed at 4,03,425/- per bigha, i.e.
19,36,440/- per acre, as on 21.03.2003. xxx xxx xxx vi) Appellants and cross-objectors who have succeeded would also be entitled to solatium and interest as per statute and as clarified in the decision reported as
93(2001) DLT 569 Sunder vs. UOI, for the compensation, paid originally and as enhanced by the
Reference Court and finally on the sum enhanced by the present judgment and decree."
It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the appellant is also entitled to the relief as granted to other similarly placed appellants in the aforesaid batch of matters, to which counsel for the respondent/UOI has no objection.
Following the aforesaid decision dated 08.07.2011 in the case of
Jamna (supra), the present appeal is also disposed of on the same lines, while granting the same relief to the appellant as granted to the appellants in the LA.APP.784/2005. However, it is clarified that the appellant shall not be entitled to claim interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of delay of 447 days in filing the appeal as
LA.APP. 50812011 also the costs of the appeal, in terms of the orders passed today in CM
14297/2011 preferred by the appellant for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
HIMA KOHLI,J
• AUGUST 03, 2011 rkb
LA.APP. 50812011 Page4of4
No.133/09 arising out of Award No.3/DC(W)/2005-06 pertaining to village Mundka, pursuant to the notification dated 21.03.2003 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (in short 'the Act').
Counsel for the appellant submits that, the present case is squarely covered by the judgment of a co-ordinate Bench (Pradeep
Nandrajog, J.) passed in a batch of matters, lead matter being
LAAPP.No.784/2005 entitled 'Jamna vs. UOI & Ors.' decided as recently as on 08.07.2011. Learned counsel particularly draws the attention of this Court to the operative para 33 of the aforesaid judgment, relevant portions of which are reproduced herein below:-
"33. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the Union of
India require to be dismissed and I hereby dismiss the same. The appeals filed by the land owners and the cross-objections filed by the land owners stands decreed as under:-
LA.APP. 50812011 PlAr xxx For the land situated in village Mundka the fair market value is fixed at 4,03,425/- per bigha, i.e.
19,36,440/- per acre, as on 21.03.2003. xxx xxx xxx vi) Appellants and cross-objectors who have succeeded would also be entitled to solatium and interest as per statute and as clarified in the decision reported as
93(2001) DLT 569 Sunder vs. UOI, for the compensation, paid originally and as enhanced by the
Reference Court and finally on the sum enhanced by the present judgment and decree."
It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the appellant is also entitled to the relief as granted to other similarly placed appellants in the aforesaid batch of matters, to which counsel for the respondent/UOI has no objection.
Following the aforesaid decision dated 08.07.2011 in the case of
Jamna (supra), the present appeal is also disposed of on the same lines, while granting the same relief to the appellant as granted to the appellants in the LA.APP.784/2005. However, it is clarified that the appellant shall not be entitled to claim interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of delay of 447 days in filing the appeal as
LA.APP. 50812011 also the costs of the appeal, in terms of the orders passed today in CM
14297/2011 preferred by the appellant for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
HIMA KOHLI,J
• AUGUST 03, 2011 rkb
LA.APP. 50812011 Page4of4