Budh Ram v. Union of India & Anr

1. None has appeared on behalf of the respondent No.l/Union of India despite passover.

2. Mr.Naresh Kaushik, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that these execution appeals may also be disposed of in terms of the order dated 12*^ December, 2015 passed by this Court in Ex.F.A. Nos.13-17/2005 & 19-31/2005 and identical ordermay be passed in these cases as well.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants has also placed on record copy of the order dated 12^ December, 2005 passed by this Court in Ex.FA Nos.13- 17/2005 & 19-31/2005 which reads has under:- "1have heard the learned counselfor theparties. It is admitted by the counselfor theparties that thepetitioners in Ex.F.A.Nos. 13/2005 15/2005, 29/2005, 30/2005, 31/2005 hadfiled appeals before the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Delhi High Courtdated22.7.1998 and directions have been issuedby the Supreme Court in the said appeals. With regard to Ex.F.A.Nos. 14/2005, 16-17/2005, 19-21/2005, 22- 28/2005, there is dispute whetherappeals werepreferred to the Supreme Court against the judgment of the Delhi High Court dated 22.7.1998 bythepetitioners herein. There is also a dispute whether any appeal had been preferred by the respondents herein before the Supreme Court against the said decision ofthe Delhi High Court in the case ofthe petitioners inEFANo.29/2005. Whether or not any appeal was filed in a particular case against thejudgmentdated 22.7.1998 passed by this Courtand whether the said judgment has become final and binding between theparties has to be examinedby the execution Court EX.F.A. Nos.21/2011, 29/2011, 24/2011 & 28/2012 Page 2 of[4] in every matter. These aspects have not been considered and dealt with in the impugned order dated 16.4.2005. If the judgment ofthe Delhi High Court dated 22.7.1998 had become final between thepetitioner and the respondents, the same will have to be implemented and executed. However, in a particular case ifthe Supreme Court has modifiedor reversedjudgment of Delhi High Court dated 22.7.1998 then the said directions will be binding between the said parties. The judgment, order or directions of the Supreme Court will binding only in those cases where SLP/appeal was filed and directions have been issued and not in cases ofthepetitioners where no appeal/SLP was filed against the judgment of Delhi High Court dated 22.7.1998. In view ofthe above, the impugnedorder dated 16.4.2005 is set aside with a direction to the learned Additional District Judge to examine each case on merits as per the observations made above and accordingly proceed with the execution proceedings."

4. Mr.Arun Birbal, Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent N0.2/DDA after going through the copy ofthe order dated 12"^ December, 2015 submits that these cases may he remanded without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties as in these cases award was passed in the year 1981 which is not covered by the provisions of The Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants though refutes the contention raised on behalf of the learned counsel for the respondent N0.2/DDA prays that let these cases he remanded without prejudice to the respective rights and contentions ofthe parties.

6. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and DDA and the order dated 12'*^ December, 2005 passed by this Court in Ex.FA Nos.13-17/2005 & 19-31/2005, the impugned orders dated 2"'^ May, EX.F.A. Nos.21/2011. 29/2011, 24/2011 & 28/2012 Page 3 of[4] 2011, 16' August, 2011, 9 May, 2011 and 1®' December, 2011 passed in Ex.F.A.Nos.21/11, 29/11, 24/2011 and 28/2012 respectively are set aside with a direction to the learned Additional District Judge to examine each case on merits and accordingly proceed with the execution proceedings.

7. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Additional District Judge on3D'January, 2017.

8. The appeals stand disposed of.

9. LCR be sent back alongwith copy ofthis order.

10. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned Court(s) through concerned District Judge(s) for compliance. RANI, J. JANUARY 12, 2017 'Pg' At this stage, Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate for respondent No.l/Union of India has entered appearance and she was apprised ofthe order passed in these appeals.