MOHINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
LAWS(SC)-2014-8-6
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on
August 05,2014
MOHINDER SINGH
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
KASTURI VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]CHARAN DASS VS. HIMACHAL PRADESH HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
VITHOBA BALI PAWAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2023-7-27] [REFERRED TO]THE ASST. COMMISSIONER LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER VS. AMMANNA [LAWS(KAR)-2014-12-305] [REFERRED TO]
BULANDSHAHR KHURJA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. AMIR KUWAR AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-7-472] [REFERRED TO]
GANGA POLLUTION CONTROL UNIT, U.P. JAL NIGAM VS. GAYA PRASAD AND ANOTHER [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-90] [REFERRED TO]
IMTYAZ ALAM VS. COLLECTOR BHADHOHI [LAWS(ALL)-2017-1-460] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWANRAO VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2022-3-227] [REFERRED TO]
U.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. SMT. SUSHILA DEVI & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2015-11-209] [REFERRED TO]
POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. VS. JAGPAL SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-2-101] [REFERRED TO]
ADARSH KHALSA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2016-3-217] [REFERRED]
U.P. JAL NIGAM VS. JAWAHAR LAL AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-3-96] [REFERRED TO]
ANAND BALLABH TRIVEDI (SINCE DECEASED) VS. STATE OF U P AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-4-354] [REFERRED TO]
GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. KASHI RAM [LAWS(ALL)-2014-11-110] [REFERRED TO]
POWER GRID CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD VS. JAGPAL SINGH AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-12-51] [REFERRED TO]
BAJAJ HINDUSTAN LTD; RAJENDRA SINGH VS. RAJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS; STATE OF U P AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-7-60] [REFERRED TO]
U.P. STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND OTHERS VS. NAZIR AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-4-521] [REFERRED TO]
AMI CHAND VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-2-111] [REFERRED TO]
NALINI VS. CHIEF SECRETARY [LAWS(KAR)-2023-4-546] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P. VS. KUNWAR PAL SINGH, [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-86] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P & ANOTHER VS. RASHMI JAIN [LAWS(ALL)-2018-1-467] [REFERRED TO]
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, U P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD VS. NAZIR AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-4-95] [REFERRED TO]
U.P. AVAS EVAM VIKAS PARISHAD VS. SMT. RUKMAN DEVI & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-2-230] [REFERRED TO]
CITY INDUSTRIAL AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION VS. SUNIL, S/O RATANLAL JETHLIYA [LAWS(BOM)-2018-2-343] [REFERRED TO]
ASHA RAM & ANOTHER VS. U.P.A.E.P. & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2015-12-282] [REFERRED TO]
BULANDHSHAHR KHURJA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. HAMID ALI SINCE DECEASED [LAWS(ALL)-2019-9-106] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)All these appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 11.9.2000 in LPA No.210 of 1999 and connected appeals passed by the Division Bench of the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.
(3.)The State of Haryana issued Notification dated 2.12.1982 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, intending to acquire 327.52 acres in village Patti Jhambra, Shahabad in District Kurukshetra for a public purpose namely to develop and utilize the land for residential, commercial industrial area for the urban Estate of Shahabad. Section 6 Notification was issued on 4.7.1984 in relation to 178.62 acres, though on actual measurement, the possession of the land taken was found only 90.07 acres.
After hearing the objections of the land-owners/claimants the Collector by his Award dated 16.9.1986 awarded compensation at different rates per acre, classifying the lands as Chahi, Abadi plot, Gair Mumkin and Banjar quadim.
Having not satisfied with the amount awarded, the claimants filed applications for reference under Section 18 of the Act and the Collector referred them to the District Judge, Kurukshetra for determining the value of the lands. The Reference Court after hearing both the parties on the basis of the evidence adduced, awarded uniform compensation at Rs.2,66,400/- per acre in his Award dated 31.5.1991. Feeling dissatisfied with the said Award the State filed Regular First Appeals seeking reduction in the amount of compensation and the claimants filed independent appeals for enhancement of the compensation. The learned single Judge of the High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the State and dismissed the appeals of the claimants and held that the claimants are entitled to get compensation at the rate of Rs.1,83,080/- per acre along with solatium and interest and statutory benefits. Feeling aggrieved the claimants preferred Letters Patent Appeals and the Division Bench of the High Court partly allowed the claimants appeals and modified the award to the extent that claimants are entitled to get compensation at the rate of Rs.2,19,696 per acre along with other benefits as awarded by the Reference Court. Feeling dissatisfied the State preferred the present appeals seeking reduction in the amount of compensation and the claimants preferred separate appeals seeking for enhancement of the compensation.
(2.)All these appeals are directed against the common judgment dated 11.9.2000 in LPA No.210 of 1999 and connected appeals passed by the Division Bench of the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.
(3.)The State of Haryana issued Notification dated 2.12.1982 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, intending to acquire 327.52 acres in village Patti Jhambra, Shahabad in District Kurukshetra for a public purpose namely to develop and utilize the land for residential, commercial industrial area for the urban Estate of Shahabad. Section 6 Notification was issued on 4.7.1984 in relation to 178.62 acres, though on actual measurement, the possession of the land taken was found only 90.07 acres.
After hearing the objections of the land-owners/claimants the Collector by his Award dated 16.9.1986 awarded compensation at different rates per acre, classifying the lands as Chahi, Abadi plot, Gair Mumkin and Banjar quadim.
Having not satisfied with the amount awarded, the claimants filed applications for reference under Section 18 of the Act and the Collector referred them to the District Judge, Kurukshetra for determining the value of the lands. The Reference Court after hearing both the parties on the basis of the evidence adduced, awarded uniform compensation at Rs.2,66,400/- per acre in his Award dated 31.5.1991. Feeling dissatisfied with the said Award the State filed Regular First Appeals seeking reduction in the amount of compensation and the claimants filed independent appeals for enhancement of the compensation. The learned single Judge of the High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the State and dismissed the appeals of the claimants and held that the claimants are entitled to get compensation at the rate of Rs.1,83,080/- per acre along with solatium and interest and statutory benefits. Feeling aggrieved the claimants preferred Letters Patent Appeals and the Division Bench of the High Court partly allowed the claimants appeals and modified the award to the extent that claimants are entitled to get compensation at the rate of Rs.2,19,696 per acre along with other benefits as awarded by the Reference Court. Feeling dissatisfied the State preferred the present appeals seeking reduction in the amount of compensation and the claimants preferred separate appeals seeking for enhancement of the compensation.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.