Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
-I- LA.APP. 251/2007 UoI Appellant
Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Advocate
-I- LA.APP. 251/2007 UoI Appellant
Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Advocate
VERSUS
M.S.MATHUR & ANR Respondents
Through: Mr. A.S. Mathur, Advocate for RI Mr. S.K. Sethi, Advocate for DDA/R-2
Through: Mr. A.S. Mathur, Advocate for RI Mr. S.K. Sethi, Advocate for DDA/R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. BHASIN i-i 0/ /0
25.01.2011
25.01.2011
CM APPL. 11315/2007
Today counsel for respondents state that they have no objection if this application for condonation of delay in the filing of the appeal is allowed and the delay is condoned as had been done in two other appeals of Union of India arising out of the same award. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the delay in the filing of the appeal stands condoned.
Today counsel for respondents state that they have no objection if this application for condonation of delay in the filing of the appeal is allowed and the delay is condoned as had been done in two other appeals of Union of India arising out of the same award. Accordingly, this application is allowed and the delay in the filing of the appeal stands condoned.
LA.APP. 251/2007
With the consent of the counsel for the parties this appeal is taken up today for final hearing. It has been submitted from both the sides that the
Reference Court had enhanced the market value of the land in question to
2,000/- per sq. yard relying upon one
With the consent of the counsel for the parties this appeal is taken up today for final hearing. It has been submitted from both the sides that the
Reference Court had enhanced the market value of the land in question to
2,000/- per sq. yard relying upon one
ORDER
of a Division Bench of this Court in Bliola Nat/i & Others Vs. Union of India (RFA No. 61 of 1981) decided on
21" August, 1998 (MANU/DE/006411998) which was also an appeal in respect of the land in village Bahapur though the notification under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act in that case was dated 30th1 June. 1978 while in the present case the notification was dated
6th June, 1978. Counsel for the parties further submitted
21" August, 1998 (MANU/DE/006411998) which was also an appeal in respect of the land in village Bahapur though the notification under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act in that case was dated 30th1 June. 1978 while in the present case the notification was dated
6th June, 1978. Counsel for the parties further submitted
LA.APP. 251/2007 Page 1 of3
2011:DHC:12122 MINIM MA that that judgment of this Court was challenged by Delhi Development Authority before the Supreme Court and it has succeeded there in getting Bhola Nath's judgment set aside. Vide judgment dated
8th December, 2010 in Civil Appeal Nos.
10326-10327 of 2010 the Hon'ble Supreme Court while setting aside Bhola
Nath's judgment of this Court has remanded back the matter to the Reference
Court for fresh determination of the market value of the acquired land in village
Bahapur after giving opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence. Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that since the very basis of fixation of the market value in the present case by the Reference Court has ceased to exist and the Reference Court having not. taken into consideration other evidence adduced in some of the cases in respect of the same village, which are all listed today, it would be appropriate if after setting aside the impugned judgment of the
Reference Court the matter is remanded back for fresh determination of the market value of the acquired land in question after giving an opportunity to all the parties, if they would so desire, to adduce more evidence in support of their respective claims. It is also submitted that in case this Court remands back the matter to the Reference Court they would be making a prayer to the Reference
Court where cases arising out of subsequent notification dated
30th June, 1978 are to be taken up after remand by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, that those cases as well as the present cases are taken up together since there is every likelihood of evidence being common in all the matters.
In view of the aforesaid joint prayer having been made by counsel for all the parties, which appears to this Court also to be justified in view of the setting aside of the judgment of this Court in BholaNath's case, the judgment and decree of the Reference Court passed in the present case are set 'aside and the matter is remanded back to the Reference Court with a direction for passing of a fresh judgment after giving opportunity to both the sides for adducing further evidence, if they shall so desire.
Parties shall now appear before the Reference Court in respect of District
South at Saket Court Complex, where counsel state, other cases of the same village are already pending, on
25th February, 2011 at 2.00 p.m. The Reference
Court shall make all efforts to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible.
JANUARY 25, 2011 a AO
2011:DHC:12122 MINIM MA that that judgment of this Court was challenged by Delhi Development Authority before the Supreme Court and it has succeeded there in getting Bhola Nath's judgment set aside. Vide judgment dated
8th December, 2010 in Civil Appeal Nos.
10326-10327 of 2010 the Hon'ble Supreme Court while setting aside Bhola
Nath's judgment of this Court has remanded back the matter to the Reference
Court for fresh determination of the market value of the acquired land in village
Bahapur after giving opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence. Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that since the very basis of fixation of the market value in the present case by the Reference Court has ceased to exist and the Reference Court having not. taken into consideration other evidence adduced in some of the cases in respect of the same village, which are all listed today, it would be appropriate if after setting aside the impugned judgment of the
Reference Court the matter is remanded back for fresh determination of the market value of the acquired land in question after giving an opportunity to all the parties, if they would so desire, to adduce more evidence in support of their respective claims. It is also submitted that in case this Court remands back the matter to the Reference Court they would be making a prayer to the Reference
Court where cases arising out of subsequent notification dated
30th June, 1978 are to be taken up after remand by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, that those cases as well as the present cases are taken up together since there is every likelihood of evidence being common in all the matters.
In view of the aforesaid joint prayer having been made by counsel for all the parties, which appears to this Court also to be justified in view of the setting aside of the judgment of this Court in BholaNath's case, the judgment and decree of the Reference Court passed in the present case are set 'aside and the matter is remanded back to the Reference Court with a direction for passing of a fresh judgment after giving opportunity to both the sides for adducing further evidence, if they shall so desire.
Parties shall now appear before the Reference Court in respect of District
South at Saket Court Complex, where counsel state, other cases of the same village are already pending, on
25th February, 2011 at 2.00 p.m. The Reference
Court shall make all efforts to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible.
JANUARY 25, 2011 a AO