1. The appellant, who is the cousin sister of the respondent Nos. 2 to 4, is claiming 1/3rd share in the compensation given for a part of the land in village Bawana, Delhi which was acquired by the Union of India (respondent No.1) vide Award No. 9/99/2000. Said land was bearing Khasra Nos. 15/1 (4-16) and 4/21/3 (1-4) situate in the revenue estate of village Bawana, Delhi. This land was in the name of the three brothers, namely, Shri Sohan Lal, Shri Bhudatt and Shri Bishan Dutt, who were also jointly declared as bhumidars of the aforementioned land under the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Land Reforms Act). All these brothers have since died. The appellant is the daughter of late Shri Sohan Lal, who died in the year 1952, i.e. before the promulgation of Hindu

Succession Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Hindu Succession Act). Respondents No. 2 to 4 are the sons of late Shri Bhudatt and late Shri Bishan Dutt.

2. For claiming 1/3rd share, the appellant made application to the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC), who sent a reference under Section 30 and 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, the Act) in respect of 1/3rd share of late Shri Sohan Lal in view of the dispute created by the respondent Nos. 2 to 4 contending that after the death of Shri Sohan Lal in the year 1952, his share also devolved upon the male persons in the family and could not go to the daughter (appellant herein). As there was no dispute about the remaining 2/3rd share of the compensation payable to respondent Nos. 2 to 4, LAC disbursed that portion of the share to the respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

3. Vide judgment dated 21.4.2008, the learned ADJ has held that the appellant would not be entitled to any compensation as there was no law under which the daughter could inherit share in the property of her father after fathers death and under the provisions of the Land Reforms Act, said share of late Shri Sohan Lal devolved upon respondent Nos. 2 to 4, who are male members in the family; albeit the nephew, and in fact mutated in their names as well in the revenue records on 11.7.1995.

4. The learned ADJ noted that certain facts were not in dispute and for proper appreciation of the matter, it would be necessary to reproduce those facts, which are as under :- (i) Shri Bhudatt, Shri Bishan Dutt and Shri Sohan Lal, all sons of Shri Ami Lal were in possession and cultivating the land comprised in khasra Nos. 15/1 min (4-16), 4/21/3 min. (1-4) of village Bawana since prior to 1954. (ii) Shri Sohan Lal died on 14.08.1982 (the appellant has placed on record death certificate of Shri Sohan Lal, which is Ex.IP4/C). (iii) After the death of Shri Sohan Lal in the year 1952, the above-said land was continued to be cultivated by his brothers/co-sharers Shri Bhudatt and Shri Bishan Datt only. (iv) Appellant was 12 years of age at the time of her fathers death and she got married in the year 1953. After her marriage, she has normally been residing at her matrimonial home in Sonepat, Haryana. (v) Appellant never cultivated the above-said land. (vi) Although Shri Sohan Lal died in 1952, but in the revenue record, he was continued to be shown to be in possession of the said land. (vii) AS a result of the fact that Shri Sohan Lal was continued to be shown in the revenue record to be in possession of the said land even after his death, he was also declared bhumidar along with his brothers Shri Bhudatt and Shri Bishan Datt on commencement of the Land Reforms Act, on the basis of possession entries in the khasra girdawaries for the year 1953-54. (viii) After the death of Shri Bhudatt and Shri Bishan Datt, the names of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 were recorded in the revenue record as their legal heirs, successors and legal representatives with respect to the above-said land, as described at (i) above.

(ix) Notification under Section 4 of the Act for acquisition of the land of revenue estate of village Bawana including above said land