Renu Vij v. Union of India & Ors.

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may No be allowed to see the Judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No

3. Whether the judgment should be No reported in the Digest? HIMA KOHLI, J. (ORAL)

1. The land of the appellant situated in village Tikri Kalan was acquired by the respondent/UOI vide preliminary notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) on 16.11.1995. This was followed by the declaration under Section 6 of the Act dated 03.01.1996. In view of the urgency of the scheme, the provisions of Section 17(1) of the Act were also made applicable and the possession of the land was taken over on 30.01.1996. Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Collector made and pronounced his award under Section 11 of the Act, being Award No. 18/1997-98 dated 23.12.1997. In his award, the 2010:DHC:1640 Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the land at the rate of Rs.1,68,000.00 per bigha for category “A” leveled land and Rs.1,26,340.00 for category “B” land, besides other statutory benefits.

2. The appellant, dis-satisfied with the said determination of the market value of the land, preferred a reference petition under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of the compensation, which was referred to the court of the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi. The learned Additional District Judge vide order and judgment dated 27.09.2006, enhanced the compensation to Rs.1,73,040.00 per bigha, irrespective of categorization of land and also granted other statutory benefits in accordance with law.

3. The appellant, still dis-satisfied by the enhancement granted by the learned Reference Court, preferred the present appeal seeking compensation at the rate of Rs. 2,68,000.00 per bigha besides the statutory benefits. As there was delay of 14 months and 24 days in preferring the appeal, today, counsel for the appellant made a statement in CM 5048/2010 that in the event any enhancement is granted by this Court, the appellant would not claim interest for the period of delay and also not press for costs of the appeal. On his statement, the delay in filing the appeal was condoned subject to the condition that the appellant would not be entitled to interest for the period of delay, i.e., 14 months and 24 days and also the costs of the appeal.

4. It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that a Division Bench of this Court in a batch of matters, including LAA No. 193/2006 entitled Pratap Singh deceased through LRs vs. Union of India and Ors., decided on 19.12.2008, determined the market value of the land acquired in the same village through various notifications at various rates. However, in respect of the land acquired through the notification dated 16.11.1995, the market value was assessed at Rs.2,15,160.00 per bigha for land falling in category “A” and at Rs.1,73,500.00 for category “B” land. In addition to the market value, the following statutory benefits as granted by the Reference Court were also upheld:- (a)12% additional amount on the above market value of land under section 23 (1A) of the Act. (b)30% solatium on the above market value of land under section 23 (2) of the Act. (c)Interest under section 28 of the Act at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of dispossession for the first year and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the date of the tender of compensation, which includes the benefit granted by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunder Vs. Union of India reported as 2001 (93) DLT 569.

5. Counsel for the respondent/Union of India concedes that the present case is also covered by the aforesaid judgment. He further states that the aforesaid judgment in the case of Pratap Singh (supra) has attained finality in view of the fact that the Special Leave Petitions preferred by the respondent/Union of India as also by the landowners, registered as SLP(Civil) No. 573-628/2010 have been dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 05.01.2010.

6. Guided by the judgment in the case of Pratap Singh (supra), it is held that the market value for the land falling in the category of „A‟ shall be maintained at Rs.2,15,160.00 per bigha and for category „B‟ land, at Rs.1,73,500.00. In addition to the market value, statutory benefits as granted to the appellant in the case of Pratap Singh (supra) shall also be granted to the appellants herein. However, it is clarified that the appellant shall not be entitled to claim interest on the enhanced compensation for the period of delay of 14 months and 24 days in preferring the appeal and costs in the appeal, in terms of the orders passed today in CM 5048/2010 preferred by the appellant for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

7. The appeal is disposed of.

JUDGE MARCH 19, 2010 rkb