RFA No. 72 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 72 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.09.2009 Premo Devi and others ....Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present: - Mr. Sandeep Panwar, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. Rajeev Kawatra, Sr. DAG, Haryana. ***** VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL) CM No. 121-CI of 2009 For the reasons stated in the application, CM is allowed and the persons named in para No. 1 of the application are ordered to be brought on record as legal representatives of Sarup Chand and Smt. Krishna, petitioners, subject to all just exceptions. Office is directed to carry out necessary correction in the memo of parties. CM No. 120-CI of 2009 This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been moved for condoning the delay of 536 days in filing the appeal. The ground taken for condonation of delay reads as under: - “That the appellants are simple and uneducational person and father of appellant No. 1 to 5 namely Sarup RFA No. 72 of 2009 (O&M) -2- Chand has given all the documents for filing the appeal before this Hon'ble Court to one Mahavir Singh through home the petitioner have engaged the counsel for filing the reference under section 18 of land acquisition act before the Ld. ADJ Kaithal, meanwhile Sh. Sarup Chand fell ill and died on 27.3.2008 and Smt. Krishna i.e. petitioner no. 2 also died on 22.4.2008. Sh. Sarup Chand and Smt. Krishna were elders of their family and looking after the case. The appellants remained under the impression that appeal has been filed by Sh. Sarup Chand i.e. father of appellant no. 1 to 5 and Smt. Krishna i.e. mother of appellant no 6 to 10. But when the appellants have got the notice of counter appeal filed by the State Government fixed for 10.11.2008, before this Hon'ble Court. They have enquired about their R.F.A. which was supposed to be filed by Sh. Sarup Chand and Smt. Krishna and the appellants have come to know that R.F.A. By the appellants has not been filed. After that they immediately contacted their counsel and filed the present appeal without any further undue delay on their part.” The application is supported by an affidavit. Notice of the application was given. No reply has been filed. The averments made in the application go unrebutted. For the reasons stated in the application, CM is allowed and the delay of 536 days in filing the appeal is condoned. RFA No. 72 of 2009 With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final disposal. It is not in dispute, that the appeal is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in RFA No. 5466 of 2008 titled Kirpal Singh Vs. RFA No. 72 of 2009 (O&M) -3- State of Haryana and others, decided on 27.3.2009. In view of the decision of this Court in RFA No. 5466 of 2008 titled Kirpal Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others (supra), this appeal is allowed, the impugned award is set aside and the case is remanded back to the learned Reference Court for fresh consideration of the evidence placed on record by the parties. The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Kaithal, on 9.10.2009 for further proceedings. The learned District Judge, Kaithal, shall be at liberty to either keep the reference with him or entrust the same to any other Additional District Judge. It is further directed that, the compensation already paid to the appellant-land/owners in terms of the impugned award shall not be recovered back from them in view of the setting aside of the award by this Court. However, it shall abide by any final order passed by learned Reference Court afresh. (Vinod K. Sharma) Judge September 07, 2009 R.S.