RFA No.5492 of 2009 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.5492 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:15.09.2011 Union of India ....Appellant Versus Dharampal and others ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG 1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocate for Mr. G.S.Hooda, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Shailendra Jain, Advocate for the private respondents. * * * RAKESH KUMAR GARG, J (ORAL) Union of India has filed the instant appeal challenging the award dated 1.4.2009 of Additional District Judge, Gurgaon passed under Section 28-A(3) of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act') whereby the re-determination of the compensation by the Land Acquisition Collector vide order dated 3.7.2007, was upheld. The brief facts of the case are that vide notification dated 12.10.1983 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act which was followed by declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act on 26.4.1985, the land in question was acquired for the benefit of the appellant. The Land Acquisition Collector pronounced the award on 23.4.1987. Respondents/landowners herein did not file reference applications under RFA No.5492 of 2009 (O&M) 2 Section 18 of the Act, whereas, the other land-owners whose land was acquired alongwith the land of respondents vide same notification, filed reference applications which were decided by the Reference Court on 26.08.1991 in LAC No.37 of 1990 titled as Om Parkash and another vs. State of Haryana determining compensation for the acquired land @ Rs.70/- per square yard. Thereafter, the respondents/landowners filed applications on 28.11.1991 under Section 28-A of the Act before the Land Acquisition Collector for re-determination of their compensation on the basis of the aforesaid award of the Reference Court in LA Case No.37 of 1990 titled as Om Parkash and another vs. State of Haryana. Thereafter, the District Revenue Officer-cum Land Acquisition Collector, Gurgaon vide award dated 3.7.2007 re-determined the compensation of the land of the respondents @ Rs.70/- per square yard on the basis of the LAC No.37 of 1990 titled as Om Parkash and another vs. State of Haryana decided on 26.8.1991. Still not satisfied the claimants filed references for further enhancement of compensation under Section 28-A(3) of the Act which were referred to the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon. Aforesaid references were contested by the appellant by filing written statement raising a preliminary objection that the application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act was filed after the expiry of limitation period and therefore the re-determination under Section 28-A vide award dated 3.7.2007 was illegal. Vide impugned award dated 1.4.2009, the Court of Additional District Judge, Gurgaon held that the application filed by the respondents- RFA No.5492 of 2009 (O&M) 3 landowners under Section 28-A was well within limitation period. The award dated 3.7.2007 was also upheld and no further enhancement was ordered. The relevant paras of the said award reads thus:- “Now perusal of the file shows that he judgment titled as Om Parkash and another vs. State of Haryana bearing L.A. Case No.37 of 28.7.1990 was decided on 26.8.1991. A perusal of the copy of the judgment Om Parkash etc. vs. State of Haryana, on the basis of which the petitioners filed application under Section 28(A) of the Act shows that the application for supply of copy of judgment was presented on 28.9.1991 and the copy was prepared on 11.11.1991 and the the present petition under Section 28-A (1) of the L.A. Act was filed on 28.11.1991. The period provided for filing the application under Section 28-A(1) of the Act is three months from the date of award and proviso added to Section 28(A) 1 shows that in computing the period of three months within which an application to the Collector shall be made under this Sub-Section, the date on which the award was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded. In the present case, award was announced on 26.8.1991 and the copy was applied on 28.9.1991 and the copy was prepared on 11.11.1991. Thus, the period from 28.9.91 to 11.11.1991 would be excluded in computing the period of three months. Thus, computed the present application under Section 28-A(3) of the L.A.Act having been filed on 11.8.1993 is well within limitation. Hence after rebutting the plea raised on behalf of respondents in petition under Section 28-A(3) of the L.A.Act, I hold that Land Acquisition Collector vide impugned judgment /order dated 3.7.2007 has legally re-determined the amount of compensation and the same is maintained. The petitioners are entitled to receive the compensation RFA No.5492 of 2009 (O&M) 4 amount as per order dated 3.7.2007. Hence, this issue is accordingly decided in favour of the petitioners.” Still not satisfied from the aforesaid award dated 1.4.2009, the Union of India has filed the instant appeal challenging the impugned award. The only ground raised before this Court to challenge the impugned award dated 1.4.2009, on behalf of Union of India is that the application filed under Section 28-A of the Act by the respondents-landowners for re- determination of compensation for their acquired land was filed after expiry of limitation period of 90 days. According to the learned counsel for the appellant the application under Section 28-A was filed by the respondents on 28.11.1993 whereas the award in LAC 37 of 1990 was passed by the Reference Court on 26.8.1991. However, a perusal of the record clearly shows that the application filed under Section 28-A of the Act by the Respondents- landowners is dated 25.11.1991 and the same was filed on 28.11.1991. Even, Union of India was directed to be served for 23.12.1991 vide order dated 10.12.1991 by the Land Acquisition Collector. In view of this fact alone, the argument raised by the counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant is without any substance. No other point has been argued before this Court. Even otherwise the Union of India-appellant has not challenged the award dated 3.7.2007 of the Collector under Section 28-A of the Act at any point of time and had raised the plea of limitation in defence to the reference application filed under Section 28-A(3) of the Act by claimants for further enhancement which has not been applied. RFA No.5492 of 2009 (O&M) 5 Since this appeal is being dismissed on merits, the question of condoning the delay of 90 days in re-filing this appeal does not survive. Dismissed. September 15, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR GARG) savita JUDGE