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

2012 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 4125

* IN rfllE HIG·H C()URT OF I)ELH:l A NEW l)E.L:HI Reserved on: February 08, 2012 Pronounced on : March 14, 2012 RA VINDER KUMAR ..... Appellant Through: Mr.B.D.Sharma, Mr.S.K.Rout, Ms.Sukhda DhamUa and Mr.B .K.Routray, Advocates versus U01& ANR ..... Respondent 'rhrough: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Senior Advocate with Mr.Sanjay Pathak,Ms.K.Kiran Pathak, Mr.Surya Nath Pandey, Mr.Yeeshu Jain and Ms.Navlin Swain, Advocates for LAC/UOI (Relating to Notification No. F. 7/60/200 lIL&B/LA/MRTS(S/W)/7674 of 05.08.2003 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 & Award No. 5/2005-06 of Village Masoodabad, Delhi)

CORAM:

HON'HL.E MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

ORDER

14.03.2012 For orders see LA.APPA2l/2010, titled as Suresh Prasad llliasHari Kishan vs. Union of/ndia & Anr.

NIL GAUR)

JUDGE March 14,2012 pkb f)

'

.-.: Z.

I,e:..

< i .

I -

Z «<

'.

«<

N Q.. 0... Cl..

[,o -.

r----.

f"C -

1 <: .,...., 0:

U-

' .- -' - - < x -" -.T ..: -r -" .l . < -\Q-- -1----

---... 0 -v > ( C", 1 r< ; . )

o('I .r :', :) ; ;(' -,l '

u .-

Vj .-v < «< < < «< z.

Z 1>""-'.

:::... !=- C_ :... :/) :...

C . . .

G ..

Q .. 7.ZZZZZ ZZZ Z .' ""\

ZZZ o COO C 0 C 0 c z c ..... :.. ...

-

- -<, "-: 1 -:: "t.

I -.n ..c I '" :n J7 ', r" ', '7 C -', '" r..7 -0 r.. -q -

' 0C- in C I tYn nJ (C ". .., CII /; '

X'r f--

{ t." rl- , ""'" . 01- - . (" 'I " N'-. ' C-'.. '. !.. . C--- '. I. , - (- "-. ': 1.. ,,1 - 0- 1.. . (,- . . j. . . rl- . C ("'I <-

_CCCOOl:,)COC"; c1 .." " -"

.

« < <, <, < « < <. < «<

..C >-

«< e:...c-e:.. CL c.. c.. ZZZZZZZ2:'Z.Z ZZz c 0 ceo C C 0 -:) C () "7 "7 "'7' ':::::t" I.r, C:..: r- r-- r-- 0\ ;c, ,If .', -

\..C '....c o\{ C;I -: .- ..- .- ..

C/':. C' J

2; 0"< -:j'if', r-

1 C c" \ .c:

("j ("",j "j c(:.) - C,1 r I '::::::>

oC', }

- :(" :- " :. , :. , .1. : 'r. 8'.j (. I [

"b N 0 I J\.!\pp. No. 755/2010 LA.!\pp. No. 756/20 i () II '/\.. I\P. I), .I 0 :j.. · .,1 )(. I/\./\pp. No. 859/2010 I ,;\.App. i'io. 860/20 I 0 1./\. /\pp. No. 861/20 J 0 I./\.!\ pp. No. 86)/20 I () I.I\./\pp. I\JO. 10 I.A./\pp. No, 865/20 I 0 I!\./\pp. No. 8661:2010 I J 1\ .1\ . p p. NI O. (o> ()' 711 _. (" , 1 \I,) ! ,/\.!\pp. 868/2010 I,/\.!\pp. No. 869120 I 0 LA./\pp. No. 267/2011 I 011 \ .iA\p p. NI O. --")7/; _( _ .'J1 ( ..' I I.!\./\pp. No. 2112012 LA.!\pp. No. 56/2012 (Relating to Notification No, r:.7/60/2001/L&13/[.;\/MRTS(S/vV)17674 of 05.08.2003 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 & Award No. 5/2005-06 oLVillage Masooclabad, Delhi)

CORAM:

HON'BLEMR . .JUSTICE SUNIL GAUH OHDEH 14.03.2012 I. For 'Najaffsarh Depol. ;V/I(/S Projeel " 61 () bighas and I J biswas of' land 01' Village Masoodabacl was acquired vide NOli licaLioll of .sIll .!\ugust. 2003 under Sectiol1 4 01' Lhe I,and !\cquisiLion Act, 1894 which or was bv Notificalion Sill 2003 under Section 60Cthe .I __ ,. .. - -

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 rcsu lting in passi ng 0 r Award No.5/2005-06 granting compensation at the rale of Rs.! 5.70 lacs per acre on the basis of indicative price fixed by the Government. of NeT of Delhi for the agricultural lands in Delhi.

2. In the reference sought by the claimants, (u) I 0°;;) pCI'

or annum was granted by the Rei'ercnce lor the perioci two years.

_ i.c., from t.he of lixing of the minilllurn agriculLural price ulOltn the elate of Notilicalion, i.e., compensation amount s\ooci enhanced 10 Rs. !8,84.000 Ix:r acrc for the acquired i<'lJlci in Ljllestioll.

or

3. In the instant I'urther enhanceillenl Rs.SO lacs per acre is sought by the claimants, whereas the respondent ill their appea.ls have sought setting aside of the impugned order of the R.efcrcncc Court and restoration of the A\vard. Since the grounds urged 111 these appeals is U\.!\pp. No. 121 /2()] 0 & Connected Appeal:; of Village Mas()oc\c\l'lcl(.l COllllT10n, therefore, by this COllllllon order" these appeal::.: "liT • 1._"

disposed or.

or

6, According io the 1c,1rncd counsel for the (lppeliants/clai!'nams, the best IJicce of ('vidence. i,c, allotment. o!'land in ViIl21[I:e iVIasoociabad and '--

Ndjafgarh by /)1)/\ te) Delhi .Ial Boarci :.11 lhc ,'::tLe or 1<.5,20 lacs per acre in the year 1993 has been illegally discarded by the Reference Court. Reliance is placed upon the decisions reported in Tindey Ors. v,'. Union & An!", 2000(54)DRJ (DB) P.N.Singh vs. Unionol IA!\pp, No, 421/20] 0 ('\i COllllected Appeals of Village MClsooli;:li);Jci ",',0.,.,.

India. 1997 I /\/) (Dcl) tn: I-fori Chand ps. Union 91 (2001) 1)1.1' 602; Delhi Developl'nent Aul/tori(F vs. Land Acquisition Collector & On. ... 130(2006) DT I (DB): A InUi Singl' (died) through LRs vs. State & Anr .. AIR 2008 SC 709; IHahllhir Prm'iad Suntuka and sec Or ...'. . Vs Collector. Cultack find Or .. ,'. • (1987) 1 587; Thakur Kuldeep Singh (DJ Thr. L.R. &

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top