Jagmel Singh vs Special Land Acquisition Collector

Sat Pal, J. (Oral)

Heard. CM is allowed and the appellants are exempted from filing certified copies of Annexures A1 and A2. CM stands disposed of.

CM 4335 of 1997

This CM has been filed under section 151 CPC for placing on record Annexures A1 and A2. CM is allowed and Annexures A1 and A2 annexed with the CM are ordered to be placed on record.

CM 4336 of 1997

This application has been filed under section 151 CPC for early hearing and final disposal of the case. In this application, it has been stated that land of Kishan Singh, Kartar Singh, Milkha Singh, Prem Singh and Gurnam Singh which was acquired vide the same notification under section 4 and section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and was situated right opposite to the land of the appellantapplicant. It has further been stated that land of the applicant and said landowners was separated only by the main road. In para4 of the application, it has been stated that against the same award one reference was made by the above mentioned landowners which was disposed of by the learned Additional District Judge vide judgment dated 22.3.1986 and the reference made by the applicant was disposed of vide judgment dated 28.8.1984 passed by another learned Presiding Officer. It has further been stated that in the reference filed by the above mentioned landowners, the rate of the land was fixed at Rs. 96,800/ per acre and the appeal filed by the landowners as well as the Union of India against the judgment dated 22.3.1986 has been dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 24.1.1989. Keeping in view these facts, it has been prayed that since the landowners mentioned herein above have been awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 96,800/ per acre, the applicant land owner be also granted compensation at the same rate. Notice of this application was issued to the learned counsel for Union of India. Mr. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India has not controverted the facts stated in the application. Both the counsels, therefore, agree that the main appeal itself be decided today.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India, however, submits that in the judgment dated 24.1.1989 upholding the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge dated 22.3.1986, the landowners have also been granted the benefit of section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act whereas in the present case the land owner is not entitled to the said benefit as in his case award was made on 18.5.1983. Mr. Suri, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has, however, drawn my attention to a judgment rendered by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in K.S. Paripoornan v. State of Kerala and others, AIR 1995 SC 1012 : 1995(1) RRR 40 (SC). and contends that in terms of the law laid down in the said judgment, the appellant is entitled to the benefit under section 23 (1A) of the Land Acquisition Act as the award in the present case was passed on 18.5.1983 (which is after 30.4.1982).

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, I am of the opinion that the present case is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court in Kishan Singh and others v. Collector, Ludhiana, RFA 1787 of 1986 decided on 24.1.1989 copy of which has been annexed as Annexure A2. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of in terms of the judgment dated 24.1.1989 in the case of Kishan Singh (supra). Consequently, the appellant/landowner shall be entitled to the compensation at the rate of Rs. 96,800/ per acre and he will also be entitled to the benefit under section 23 (1A) and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act in terms of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of K.S. Paripoornan (supra). With this order CM 4336/1997 and appeal stand disposed of.