- (1.) Heard Sri Y.D. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant/ appellant and Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent on Delay Condonation Application No.123032 of 2014 and Civil Misc. Recall Application No.123034 of 2014, Delay Condonation Application No.351666 of 2011 and Modification Application No.351669 of 2011, Delay Condonation Application No.4846 of 2015 and Civil Misc. Review Application No.4845 of 2015.
(2.) As per memorandum of appeal, this appeal was preferred by the claimant appellant on the following grounds: "1. Because the learned District Judge has erred in not awarding the compensation at the rate of Rs.10/ - per square yard or Rs.30,250/ - per bigha. 2. Because the learned District Judge has committed error of law in not treating the sale deeds Ex.1 to Ex.7 filed by the claimant as exemplar sale deeds. The said deeds were exemplar sale deeds and should have been relied upon in assessing the amount of compensation payable to the appellant. 3. Because it is settled by the decision of the Supreme Court that even if a small parcel of land is sold at a particular rate and thereafter the rest of the plot is acquired, the compensation should be given at the rate at which the small parcel of land had been sold earlier. 4. Because the learned District Judge has acted illegally in ignoring the fact that the compensation of land acquired by Noida in the adjoining village Raghunathpur had been awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Ghaziabad vide his award dated 28.09.1978 at the rate ranging between Rs.12,924.65 and Rs.24,450=53 per bigha. This fact furnished good exemplar for awarding the compensation to the appellant at the rate of Rs.10/ - per square yard. 5. Because the learned District Judge has not considered the fact that the land being very near to Delhi and a number of coloneys and Industries existing near the land acquired, the land has a great potential value as a building site and as such compensation should have been awarded at the rate claimed by the appellant. 6. Because having held that the land acquired should be treated as potential building site, the learned District Judge has grossly erred in not awarding the compensation at the rate of Rs.10/ - per square yard or Rs.30,250/ - per bigha."
(3.) The appeal was allowed and the relief as prayed was granted by this court by order dated 29.03.2008 as under: "Heard Shri P.K.S. Paliwal learned counsel for the appellant and Sri U.S. Awasthy learned counsel for NOIDA respondent No.2 and learned standing counsel for respondent No.1. This appeal is directed against judgment award and decree dated 27.02.1982 given by District Judge, Ghaziabad in L.A. Reference No.157 of 1977. The said reference was decided along with 5 other references including L.A. Reference No.160 of 1977. The judgment in L.A. Reference No.160 of 1977 was challenged through first appeal No.83 of 1983 which has been allowed by me today holding that claimants -appellants are entitled to the compensation taking the market value of their acquired land at the relevant time to be Rs.30250/ - per bigha. For the reasons disclosed in the judgment of first appeal No.83 of 1983, this appeal is also allowed. Impugned judgment is modified and it is held that appellants are entitled to the compensation taking the market value of their acquired land at the relevant time to be Rs.30250/ - per bigha or Rs.10/ - per sq.yd. along with 15% solatium and 6% interest." ;