IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.138 of 2011 Date of decision: 25.8.2011 Laxmi Devi and another ….Petitioners. Versus The State of H.P. and others ….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Deepak Gupta, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioners: Mr. Lovneesh Kanwar, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Dy. A.G. _____________________________________________________________________ Deepak Gupta, J. (Oral) 1. By means of this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order 20.12.2010 whereby an amount of Rs.43,90,768/- has been ordered to be released in favour of the decree holders (the present petitioners) and balance amount of Rs.17,80,611/- has been ordered to be refunded to the State. 2. The undisputed facts are that some land belonging to the ancestor of the decree holders was seized by the erstwhile rulers of Mandi State. Thereafter, the State of H.P. framed a policy to return the land of those persons who had suffered and whose land had been taken over by the erstwhile Rajas, because these people were involved in the freedom struggle. A suit was filed which was finally decreed on 5.3.2003. The decree passed directed the State to return the suit land and in case that was not 1 Whether the reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes. 2 possible the petitioners were to be compensated with equivalent land of same quantity and if such land was not available the petitioners were to be paid the market value of the land. 3. It is not disputed that the claim is now restricted to the market value of the land. The State first calculated the market value at Rs.61,96,379.77 and deposited this amount but thereafter it filed fresh application before the Executing Court stating that it had recalculated the market value on the basis of one year’s average market value on the basis of the revenue record and had come to the conclusion that in fact the market value was of Rs.43,90,768.28 and not Rs.61,96,379.77. The case of the State appears to be that they have taken the average market value for the period 1.4.2002 to 31.3.2003 i.e. for the period of about one year prior to the date of decree being 5.3.2003. 4. Shri Lovneesh Kanwar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that actually the amount of Rs.61,96,379.77 had been properly calculated and this is the amount due and payable to them. The decree of the Court did not quantify the market value. It left it open to the State to quantify the market value. The State has now quantified the market value and this amount has been paid to the petitioners. In execution petition the work of quantification of market value cannot be done. 3 In case the petitioners are aggrieved by the quantification of the market value as done by the State they can file a separate suit in which they can establish what was the actual market value and accordingly claim any amount in excess of the amount paid by the State. However, in the execution proceedings the Court cannot travel beyond the decree and start making calculation of the market value. Therefore, the petition is rejected with liberty reserved to the petitioners to file a separate suit to establish the market value of the land in accordance with law. No costs. 25th August, 2011 (Deepak Gupta) ™ Judge.