State of Haryana vs Late Sh. S. Aggarwal (Deceased) and Others

Harjit Singh Bedi, J.—In this bunch of Regular First Appeal Nos.452 of 1989 (with Cross Objection N0.IO8/C of 1989), 456 of 1989, 454 of 1989, 455 of 1989,453 of 1989,430 of 1982 (with Cross Objection 138/3 of 1985), 328 of 1983, 229 of 1989, 87 of 1989, and 111 of 1989, a controversy raised by the appellant i.e. the State of Haryana, is that in view of the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in State of Punjab v. Krishan La (1987) 91 P.L.R. 680 (F.B), the benefits of Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter called the Act'', could not have been given to the claimants, as directed by the District Judge, Faridabad, vide the impugned award dated December 20, 1988. In the cross-objections filed by the claimants which are also being disposed off by this judgment, the stand of the objectors is that the award of the District Judge, was liable to be maintained on the question above noted, but in addition, they were entitled to the enhanced compensation at the rate of Rs. 7/- per square yard for the year 1978 as per notification under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act as held by this Court in Puran v. State of Haryana. through L.A.C. (1986) 89 P.L.R. 59. Learned counsel for the objectors has also relied upon Union of India v. Filip Tiago De Gama of Vedem Vasco De Gama AIR 1990 SC. 981 and Union of India v. Zora Singh etc. J.T. (1991) 4 1 in which the benefit of enhanced solatium and interest on the additional amount u/s 23(1A) of the Act, has been made applicable in cases of those claimants where the award of the Collector, or the District Judge, was rendered after April 30, 1982. Concededly in this case, the award of the Collector was rendered on September 21, 1978 whereas that of the District Judge, Faridabad, on December 20, 1988. It is, therefore, apparent that in view of the judgment cited, all the benefits envisaged by the amended Act; would be available to the objector.

There also seems to be merit in the stand of Mr. Grover, particularly, in the light of Puran''s case (supra) that as the acquired Land is situated close to Faridabad Township, the implied enhancement at the rate of Rs. 1/- per square yard per year for the period between the Notification u/s 4 and declaration u/s 6 of the Act dated October 9, 1973 and October 1,1976, should also be made available. The objectors are, therefore, also entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 3/- per square yard. Accordingly, while dismissing the State Appeals, I allow the cross objections filed by the claimants and direct that the compensation be awarded to the claimants at the rate of Rs. 21/- per square yard alongwith the benefits of the amended provisions of Land Acquisition Act. No costs.