Judgment

Mr. Harkesh Manuja, J.

Vide this order, the above-mentioned two revision petitions are being disposed of as similar issues regarding release of amount of compensation @ Rs.350/- per marla based on decision dated 21.04.2015 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No.2570-2576 of 2005 and other connected cases titled as Union of India versus Annapurana Devi (D) By LRs and others is involved, which has been declined by the Executing Court. For convenience, facts are taken from Civil Revision No.6660 of 2019, titled as Raghu Nath Singh Since Deceased Through LRs and others versus Union of India & others.

2. Briefly stating, facts are that the land owned by predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners, falling within the revenue estate of Village Mamoon, Tehsil and District Pathankot came to be acquired vide notification dated 18.02.1970 published in Punjab State in the official Gazette on 06.03.1970 under the relevant provisions of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, followed by an award.

3. Being dissatisfied with the award, arbitration was invoked wherein an award was passed on 08.08.1988 and compensation was enhanced to Rs.100/- per marla in favour of landowners.

4. Still aggrieved, FAO No.13 of 1989 was filed, impugning the award passed by the Arbitrator, the same was dismissed by this Court on 03.11.2004.

5. The judgment dated 03.11.2004 was never assailed at the instance of petitioners-landowners, however, the same was challenged at the instance of respondent-Union of India vide SLP(C) No.18743 of 2005 which came to be decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 21.04.2015, in the following manner:-

“1 The issues raised in these special leave petitions and civil appeals are squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Dilawar Singh & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., as reported in (2010) 14 SCC 357.

2. Therefore, following the observations made in the case of Dilawar Singh (supra), these special leave petitions and civil appeals are also disposed of in the same terms, directions and observations.”

6. As stated hereinabove, the SLP filed by the respondent-Union of India was disposed of in terms of observations made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Dilawar Singh & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors., wherein, landowners were directed to be awarded compensation @ Rs.350/- per marla along with solatium and interest. The operative potion of the judgment passed in Dilawar Singh’s case (supra) is reproduced hereunder:

“In the present batch of cases except the case the notification for acquisition was issued in February 1970 which is proximate in point of time to those issued in the Shanker Singh and Inder Singh’s cases (supra). The notification in Union of India v. Mohinder Singh (Civil Appeal No. 9204/2010) was issued on 12.5.1964 and published on 12.6.1964. That apart the lands in question were all acquired for the very same purpose and are situated on the outskirts of a growing town like Pathankot. The growing non-agriculture potential of such lands is also not in serious dispute. The High Court has failed to notice all these aspects apparently because the decisions in Shanker Singh’s case and that delivered in Inder Singh’s case (supra) were handed down subsequent to the impugned order. Suffice it to say that on the material available before us we see no reason why the amount of compensation payable to the landowners appellants in these appeals should also not be enhanced to Rs.350/- per marla with proportionate benefits towards solatium and interest as awarded by the Arbitrator an