Deepak Gupta, J.-Both the matters are being disposed of by a common order since identical questions of law and fact are involved in the same.

2. Civil Suit No.15 of 2009 has been filed by31 plaintiffs. According to the plaintiffs they are owners of flats/plots/houses in New Shimla. Notices have been issued to them by the defendant Himachal Pradesh Housing & Urban Development Authority (HIMHUDA). In these notices issued separately to each of the plaintiffs separate amount was demanded from each of the plaintiffs on the ground that the cost of land acquired by the defendant for setting up of the colony known as “New Shimla” has been enhanced by the HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT in proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The plaintiffs allege on various grounds that the defendant is not entitled to recover this amount from the plaintiffs. In para 11 of the plaint it is submitted that the plaintiffs are filing one single suit and they are not giving individual details with respect to each of the plaintiffs for the reasons that the core controversy is whether the defendant is entitled to claim the enhanced amount of compensation. It would be pertinent to mention that