Punjab-Haryana High Court
Union Of India vs Sham Singh on 20 December, 2024
Author: Suvir Sehgal
Bench: Suvir Sehgal
FAO-4711-2024 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(111-1)
FAO-4711-2024 (O&M)
Date of decision:- 20.12.2024
Union of India and another ... Appellants
Versus
Sham Singh (since deceased) through his LRs and others
... Respondents
(111-2) FAO-4714-2024 (O&M)
Union of India and another ... Appellants
Versus
Harinder Pal Singh and others ... Respondents
(111-3) FAO-4718-2024 (O&M)
Union of India and another ... Appellants
Versus
Ram Singh and others ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUVIR SEHGAL
Present:- Mr. B.S.Sudan, Advocate for Dr. Puneet Kaur Sekhon, Advocate
for the appellants in all the cases.
Mr. Sahil Soi, Advocate
for respondents No.1 and 2 in FAO-4711-2024.
Mr. Ajiteshwar Singh, Advocate
for respondents in FAO-4714-2024.
Mr. Satbir Rathore, Advocate,
Mr. Vinod Pundir, Advocate and Ms. Jyotika Behl, Advocate
for the respondents in FAO-4718-2024.
****
SUVIR SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
CM-17490-CII-2024 in FAO-4711-2024;
CM-17503-CII-2024 in FAO-4714-2024 &
CM-17520-CII-2024 in FAO-4718-2024
KAMAL SHARMA
2024.12.24 11:51
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Chandigarh.
FAO-4711-2024 (O&M) -2-
1. Exemption, as prayed for, is granted.
2. Applications are allowed.
CM-17491-CII-2024 in FAO-4711-2024;
CM-17504-CII-2024 in FAO-4714-2024 &
CM-17521-CII-2024 in FAO-4718-2024
3. Prayer in the applications is for condonation of delay in filing of
the appeals.
4. Notice of the applications was issued to the respondents on
01.10.2024, however, no response has been filed.
5. Having heard counsel for the parties, this Court is satisfied with
the explanation given in the applications and is of the view that the
appellants have made out a sufficient cause for condonation of delay.
6. Applications are allowed.
7. Delay in filing the appeals is condoned.
Main cases
8. This order shall dispose of above noted three appeals.
9. For the sake of convenience, factual position is being taken from
FAO No. 4711 of 2024.
10. This appeal has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “1996 Act”), assailing judgment dated
20.05.2024, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar,
whereby objections preferred by the appellants under Section 34 of the
1996 Act have been partly accepted.
11. A brief summary of facts leading to the filing of the appeal are
that land belonging to the private respondents in village Raipur, Tehsil
Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur, was acquired by virtue of notification dated
KAMAL SHARMA
2024.12.24 11:51
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Chandigarh.
FAO-4711-2024 (O&M) -3-
24.12.2004, issued under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act, 1956
(for short “1956 Act”) for widening the National Highway No.1-A. This
was followed by another notification issued on 11.07.2005, under Section
3-D of the 1956 Act. The competent authority assessed the compensation
payable to the land-owners, but dissatisfied with the amount, land-owners
filed references, which were accepted by the Commissioner, Jalandhar
Division, by his award dated 16.12.2020. Relevant extract of the award is
reproduced hereunder:-
“i. The applicants are awarded Rs.1,25,000/- (one
lac twenty five thousand) per marla for the whole of the
acquired land, which I consider to be fair and reasonable.
ii. The applicants will be entitled to interest as per
the provisions of s. 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, @
9% per annum on the excess amount, for the 1st year from
the date of taking possession of the land to the date of
payment, and 15% per annum shall be payable from the
date of expiry of said period of one year on the amount of
such excess or part thereof which has not been paid before
the date of such expiry.
iii. Easement amount of 10% is permitted.
iv. The applicants are awarded additional
compensation @ 12% per annum on the market value
assessed, for a period commencing on or from the date of
publication of the notification under s. 4 upto the date of
award of the CALA or the date of taking possession of the
land, whichever is earlier, as per section 23(1)(A) of Land
Acquisition Act, 1894, in the view of recent judgment dated
19.9.2019 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in
case titled as Union of India v/s Tarsem Singh & others.
KAMAL SHARMA 2024.12.24 11:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Chandigarh. FAO-4711-2024 (O&M) -4- v. The applicants are also awarded Solatium
amount @ 30% on such assessed market-value, in
consideration of the compulsory nature of acquisition, as
per provisions of section 23(2) of Land Acquisition Act.”
12. The appellants filed objections under Section 34 of the 1996 Act,
which have been partly accepted vide order impugned herein. The award
qua easement money and additional compensation at the rate of 12% per
annum under Section 23 (1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has been
set aside. The rest of the award has been upheld by the learned Additional
District Judge, Jalandhar.
13. During the course of arguments, counsel for the appellants is not
in a position to dispute that the appeals arising out of the same notifications
came up for consideration before this Court and by judgment dated
12.11.2018, passed in FAO No.2131 of 2014 and other connected appeals,
titled as Union of India and another Versus Sarabjit Singh and others, the
award passed by the Commissioner has been held to be reasonable. This
Court, therefore, does not find any reason to take a different view.
14. In view of the above, all appeals are disposed of in terms of
judgment passed by this Court in Sarabjit Singh‘s case (supra).
15. Pending applications, if any, are disposed off.
20.12.2024 (SUVIR SEHGAL)
Kamal JUDGE
Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
KAMAL SHARMA
2024.12.24 11:51
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
High Court, Chandigarh.