SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(All) 2144

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Sudhir Agarwal, Rajeev Misra, JJ.
Bulandshahr Khurja Development Authority - Appellants
Vs.
Amir Kuwar and Ors. - Respondent
First Appeal Nos. 264 of 2012 and 3 of 2016
Decided On : 01-07-2019

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : B. Dayal
For the Respondents: D.K. Mishra, B.B. Paul, B.K. Solanki, Dushyant Singh and M.C. Singh

Headnote:

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Section 18 – Appellant in both these appeals and Advocate, for respondents in First Appeal, In First Appeal names of three counsel appear for respondents as shown in cause list, one of whom has sought adjournment on ground of illness, but no reason has been assigned as to why other counsel are not present despite case having been called in revised. In such circumstances, we find no justification to adjourn this matter and proceed to decide present appeals after hearing above mentioned learned counsel appearing for respective parties –Held, We do not find any manifest error in both the judgments as well as awards of Reference Court. Since the points for determinations have rightly been answered against appellants, we do not find any merit in these appeals – Appeal dismissed. (Para’s 117, 118)

Facts of The case :

Appellant in both these appeals and Advocate, for respondents in First Appeal, In First Appeal names of three counsel appear for respondents as shown in cause list, one of whom has sought adjournment on ground of illness, but no reason has been assigned as to why other counsel are not present despite case having been called in revised. In such circumstances, we find no justification to adjourn this matter and proceed to decide present appeals after hearing above mentioned learned counsel appearing for respective parties.

Finding of The Court:

We do not find any manifest error in both the judgments as well as awards of Reference Court. Since the points for determinations have rightly been answered against appellants, we do not find any merit in these appeals.

Result: Appeal Dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Sri B. Dayal, Advocate for appellant in both these appeals and Sri M.C. Singh, Advocate, for respondents in First Appeal No. 3 of 2016.

2. In First Appeal No. 264 of 2012, names of three counsel appear for respondents as shown in the cause list, one of whom namely Sri D.K. Mishra has sought adjournment on the ground of illness, but no reason has been assigned as to why other counsel are not present despite the case having been called in revised. In such circumstances, we find no justification to adjourn this matter and proceed to decide present appeals after hearing above mentioned learned counsel appearing for respective parties.

3. Both these appeals arise from two similar but separate Awards of Reference Courts under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "Act 1894"), and have been filed under Section 54 of the said Act. Since they involve common and similar questions of facts and law, therefore, have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

4. Appeal No. 264 of 2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'Appeal-1') is a defendant's appeal arising from judgment and Award dated 10.5.2010 and decree dated 31.5.2010, passed by Sri Sushil Kumar, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 9, Bulandshahr (hereinafter referred to as the 'Reference Court') adjudicating Land Acquisition Reference (hereinafter referred to as 'LAR') No. 184 of 2001 (Smt. Amir kuwar v. State of U.P.), determining market value of the acquired land for the purpose of payment of compensation at the rate of Rs. 8,50,000/- per Pakka Bigha (Rs. 281/- per sq-yard) and Rs. 3,54,783/- towards cost of the trees. Reference Court has also awarded other statutory dues like 12% additional compensation, 30% solatium and interest at the rate of 9% for one year from the date of possession and for subsequent period at the rate of 15%.

5. Appeal No. 3 of 2016 (hereinafter referred to as "Appeal-2") is also a defendant's appeal arising from judgment and Award dated 24.9.2015 and decree dated 6.10.2015, passed by Sri Rajat Singh Jain, Additional District Judge, Court No. 2, Bulandshahr in LAR No. 1 of 2006, determining market value for the payment of compensation at the rate of Rs. 8,50,000/- per Pakka Bigha (Rs. 281/- per sq-yards) besides other dues like 30% solatium, 12% additional compensation and interest as per various provisions of the Statute. This Award has been delivered following earlier Award dated 10.5.2010, passed in LAR No. 184 of 2001, which is subject of Appeal-1.

Appeal-1

6. Facts in brief giving rise to this appeal are, that, Bulandshahr Khurj a Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "BKDA") is a statutory body constituted under the provisions of U.P. Urban and Planning Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Act 1973") for undertaking development in the area notified under Act 1973 of District Bulandshahr at Khurja. For the purpose of construction of residential and commercial building, BKDA proposed acquisition of land in village Akbarpur. The proposed scheme was named as 'Yamunapuram Avasiya Yojna, first phase'. It proposed acquisition of 61.801 acres (299116.84 sq-yard or 98.88 Bigha) land.

7. A notification dated 20.12.1988 under Section 4 of Act 1894 was published in U.P. Gazette on 20.12.1988. Notification dated 18.1.1989 making declaration under Section 6 of Act 1894 was published in U.P. Gazette dated 18.1.1989. Possession of land was taken on 19.5.1989 and Award was published by Special Land Acquisition Officer (hereinafter referred to as "SLAO") on 4.4.1991. The said Award, however, did not include Gatas No. 363 area 5-0-11; 385 area 10-0-11; 375 area 0-4-0 i.e. 3 plots of total area 18-5-2 for the reason that respondent Smt. Amir Kunwar Devi in appeal-1 had filed Writ Petition No. 3317 of 1989, challenging acquisition Notifications and therein, an interim ord

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top