Balwant Singh v. UOI & ANR.

$~11 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BALWANT SINGH ..... Appellant Through:

Mr. Anand Yadav and Ms. Anita Tomar, Advocates.

versus UOI & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Sanjay Kr. Pathak, Mr. Sunil Kr.

Jha and Mr.

Kushal Raj Tater, Advocates for R-1.

Mr.

S.K.Dubey and Mr.

Rajan Mangal, Advocates for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

O R D E R

% 22.07.2016 1.

This land acquisition appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter "the Act") challenges the judgment of the trial court dated 15.1.2003 by seeking enhancement of compensation granted by the impugned judgment under Section 18 of the Act. 2.

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the land which was acquired and which is the subject matter of the impugned judgment is the land in village Dhul Siras with respect to which Notifications were issued under Sections 4,6 and 17 of the Act vide Notification no. F. 7(1)/84/L&B(i)(ii)(iii)

dated 9.1.1987 and 18.9.1987 for the public purpose of construction of 400 KV Sub-station for the erstwhile Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking (DESU) and with respect to same notification the adjacent land of village Bamnauli was also acquired. With respect to the land of village Bamnauli acquired under the same notification a Division Bench of this Court in the judgment reported as Risal Singh & Ors. Vs. Union of India and Anr. 2006 (89) DRJ 527 (DB) has granted compensation @ Rs. 37,000/- per bigha in addition to the interest and statutory benefits under Section 23(1-A) of the Act and therefore this appeal be also disposed as covered by the judgment in the case of Risal Singh & Ors. (supra).

3.

Learned counsel for the respondents could not dispute that the notification which was in issue in the case of Risal Singh & Ors. (supra) is the same notification which is in issue in the present case and the land in the village Bamnauli subject matter of the decision in the case of Risal Singh & Ors. (supra) is the adjacent land to the land in village Dhul Siras. Both lands are acquired for 400 KV Sub-station. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of following the ratio in the judgment in the case of Risal Singh & Ors. (supra) and appellant will be entitled to compensation at Rs. 37,000/- per

bigha with statutory interest and other statutory benefits as per Section 23 (1-A) of the Act.

4.

The judgment in the case of Risal Singh & Ors. (supra) appealed before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP nos. 22796-22804 of 2007 on 5th July, 2010.

5.

Any inter se dispute as to who is to pay compensation ie whether the respondent no. 1 or respondent no. 2, as argued on behalf of the counsel for respondent no. 2/DPCL, is not and cannot be the subject matter of the present appeal.

6.

The appeal is allowed and disposed of accordingly. VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J JULY 22, 2016 godara/ib