132-2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

RFA No. 3398 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.01.2026

Ganpat Singh (deceased) through LRs

...Appellants

Versus

State of Haryana and others

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present: Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate

for the appellants.

Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana

Service qua respondent Nos. 4 & 5 stands dispensed with

vide order dated 19.09.2019.

****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)

CM No. 8286-CI of 2019

Prayer in the present application is for condonation of

delay of 2931 days in filing the appeal.

Notice of the application was issued on 19.09.2019.

No reply has been filed; however, learned State Counsel

vehemently opposes the prayer made in the application.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone

through the contents of the application.

Concededly, the other similarly situated landowners

pertaining to the same acquisition proceedings have already been held entitled for the enhanced amount of compensation pertaining to the acquired land falling in the same revenue estate, i.e. Village

Pataudi, Tehsil and District Gurgaon, to the tune of Rs. 20 lakhs per acre, in view of judgment/order dated 22.09.2015 passed by this Court in a bunch of appeal, lead case of which was RFA No. 5309 of 2011, titled “Janki Devi and others Versus State of Haryana and others”.

Based thereupon and applying the principle of parity, besides grant of just and fair compensation, the landowners/applicants being similarly situated are held entitled for grant of similar amount of compensation, however, without any payment of interest for the period of delay in filing the present appeal. In this regard, reliance can be placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of “Ningappa Thotappa Angadi (Dead) through LRs Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Another” reported as “2020 (19) SCC 599” and the latest exposition of law in Mohar Singh (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Collector & Ors. reported as “2023 INSC 1019” whereby, delay of 12 years and 353 days was condoned to accord parity between similarly placed landowners albeit no interest was awarded for delayed period. The relevant portion thereof is extracted hereunder:-

“12. Having heard learned Senior Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, we are satisfied that the appellants are entitled to seek parity with their co-villagers in the grant of compensation for their acquired land. This Court has consistently held in a catena of decisions that the inordinate delay in filing appeal in compensatory matters, per se, may not be fatal as the rights and equities between the parties can be well balanced by denying the statutory benefits, such as interest for the delayed period. We are thus of the considered opinion that the delay in filing the first appeal(s) could be condoned subject to the condition that the appellants would not be entitled to enure undue benefit for the delayed period. We grant such indulgence in the appellant's favour also for the reason that a batch of first appeals at the instance of other land owners was still pending consideration before the High Court. All that the High Court ought to have emphatically denied to the late-comers was the benefit of interest including on the solatium, under Section 34 of the Act for the period from the date of passing of the award by the Reference Court till the filing of the first appeals.”

(cid:1) (cid:1) In view of the discussion made hereinabove as well as contents of the application, the same is allowed and delay in filing, as mentioned above, is hereby condoned. However, the applicants shall not be entitled for interest for the period of delay in filing the appeal.

MAIN APPEAL At the outset, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment dated 22.09.2015 passed by this Court in a bunch of appeals, lead case of which was RFA No. 5309 of 2011, titled “Ja