RFA 927/2003 Page 1 of 4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % RFA NO. 927 OF 2003 + Date of Decision: 1st December, 2010 # UOI ...Appellant ! Through: Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Advocate Versus $ PRATAP SINGH & ORS. ...Respondents ^ Through: None CORAM: * HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K.BHASIN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? (No) 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? (No) 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? (No) JUDGMENT P.K.BHASIN, J (Oral): This appeal was filed by Union of India against the judgment and decree dated 22nd February, 2002 passed by the learned Additional District Judge in Land Acquisition case no. 76/1991 whereby the compensation in respect of the land of the respondents no. 1 to 4 in village Dallupura acquired by the Government pursuant to the notifications dated 17th November, 1980 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and 29th September, 1981 under Section 6 of the said Act vide award no. 79/1982-83 of the Land Acquisition Collector was enhanced from ` 12,500 per bigha awarded by the Land Acquisition RFA 927/2003 Page 2 of 4 Collector to ` 3,45,000 per bigha. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Reference Court while fixing the market value of the acquired land of the respondents nos. 1 to 4 at ` 3,45,000 per bigha had relied upon two decisions of this Court in “Anil Kumar Sharma vs. Union of India”, 86 (2001) Delhi Law Times 825 and the other one is unreported one in RFA No. 338/94 “Rattan Lal vs. UOI” decided on 24-08-2001 wherein this Court had fixed the market value of lands in villages Kondli & Dallupura respectively at ` 3,45,000 per bigha. Many cases were disposed of by this Court by these two judgments in which Delhi Development Authority was one of the parties as the beneficiary of the acquisition of lands in these two villages. Mr. Poddar further submitted that the Delhi Development Authority as well as Union of India challenged both these decisions of this Court before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the judgments of this Court in both the cases were set aside vide judgment dated 3rd August, 2004 rendered in the lead case of “Delhi Development Authority Vs. Bali Ram Sharma & Others” reported as (2004) 6 Supreme Court Cases 533. The Hon’ble Supreme Court while setting aside the fixation of market value of lands in villages Kondli and Dallupura at ` 3,45,000 per bigha reduced the same to ` 76,550 per bigha relying upon its earlier decision in “Karan Singh Vs. Union of India”, (1997) 8 SCC 186. In view of the said judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the respondents were not entitled to get compensation in respect of RFA 927/2003 Page 3 of 4 their land at a rate higher than ` 76,550 per bigha and therefore, the present appeal deserves to be allowed. 3. The respondents nos. 1 to 4, who are the claimants were served with the notice of this appeal and they entered appearance through counsel on 22-01-2004 but thereafter they were not represented when the appeal was taken up for hearing though opportunity was given to them to have their case argued. Consequently, arguments have been advanced in the matter only by counsel for the appellant. Counsel for the appellant had also submitted that the respondents nos. 1 to 4 might not be interested in defending this appeal because of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bali Ram’s case (supra) in which market value of village Dallupura, which is the village involved in the present appeal also, has been fixed at ` 76,550 per bigha. 4. I have gone through the judgment of the Reference Court and find that the learned Reference Court had relied upon the already referred two judgments of this Court while fixing the market value of land of the respondents nos. 1 to 4 at ` 345 per square yard (` 3,45,000 per bigha) and a perusal of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bali Ram’s case (supra) shows that these two judgments of this Court relied upon by the Reference Court have been set aside and the market value of land in village Dallupura has been fixed at ` 76,550 per bigha. Therefore, the impugned judgment of the Reference Court in the present case cannot be sustained and so the same is modified to the extent that the market value RFA 927/2003 Page 4 of 4 of the land of the respondents no. 1-4 shall stand fixed at ` 76,550 per bigha instead of ` 3,45,000 per bigha fixed by the Reference Court and the statutory benefits awarded to the respondents nos. 1 to 4 shall be payable now on the said amount of ` 76,550 per bigha. This appeal stands disposed of accordingly. The appellant shall be entitled to proportionate costs of the appeal. P.K. BHASIN,J December 01, 2010/pg