IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 6310-CI of 2009 & RFA No. 2248 of 2009 Date of Decision: 25.8.2009 Karan Singh ....Appellant. Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Dhiman, Advocate for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. This order shall dispose of three appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2248, 2249 and 2250 of 2009 as well as CM Nos. 6310 to 6312-CI of 2009 for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, filed by the landowners for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the reference court as the same have arisen from the same award and relate to the same acquisition. For brevity, the facts are being taken from RFA No. 2248 of 2009. The respondent-Union Territory, Chandigarh vide notification dated 3.7.1997 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) had acquired 60.52 acres of land in Village Nizampur Burail and 5 acres of land in village Jhumru, UT, Chandigarh. The Land Acquisition Collector, Chandigarh, vide its award dated 19.1.2000 awarded compensation for the acquired land at RFA No. 2248 of 2009 -2- the rate of Rs.5,91,200/- per acre and also awarded compensation for super structures, fruit/non-fruit bearing trees, tubewell and hand-pumps. The Land Acquisition Collector had also awarded scrap value to the claimants for the structures which were raised without obtaining permission from the Deputy Commissioner under the Periphery Control Act. Dissatisfied with the amount awarded by the Collector, the claimants filed a reference under Section 18 of the Act and the reference court vide its award dated 1.10.2003 had enhanced the amount of compensation by 15% in respect of the super structures over and above what was assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector and 10% enhancement was awarded in view of the difference in the market rates and schedule rates. As regards trees, 162% over the valuation as assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector was awarded. Besides the aforesaid compensation, the landowner-claimants were held entitled to costs and all other statutory benefits including solatium, additional amount and interest in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Still feeling not satisfied, the claimants have filed the instant appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation. Learned counsel for the appellant very fairly concedes that against the same acquisition, some of the other claimants as well as the Union Territory, Chandigarh, had also approached this Court. The claimants had approached this Court for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the reference court whereas the State had sought reduction in the amount of compensation. This Court vide order dated 2.8.2006 passed in RFA No.663 of 2004 (Union Territory, Chandigarh v. Sajjan Singh) had dismissed the appeals filed by the RFA No. 2248 of 2009 -3- claimants as well as the Union Territory, Chandigarh. The present appeals have been filed by the claimants for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the reference court vide the same award. In view of the above, the present appeals are dismissed in terms of the order dated 2.8.2006 passed by this Court in RFA No. 663 of 2004 (Union Territory, Chandigarh v. Sajjan Singh) and other connected appeals. Even otherwise also, all the three appeals are barred by limitation having been filed with the delay of 1889 days. However, applications for condonation of the 1889 days' delay in filing the appeals have been filed, but there being no explanation much less satisfactory for the aforesaid inordinate delay, no ground for condonation of the same is made out. The applications are also dismissed. August 25, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 6311-CI of 2009 & RFA No. 2249 of 2009 Date of Decision: 25.8.2009 Surjit Singh ....Appellant. Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Dhiman, Advocate for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. This appeal as well as the application for condonation of 1889 days' delay are dismissed. For reasons, see the judgment of even date recorded in RFA No. 2248 of 2009 (Karan Singh v. Union Territory, Chandigarh). August 25, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No. 6312-CI of 2009 & RFA No. 2250 of 2009 Date of Decision: 25.8.2009 Nakli Ram ....Appellant. Versus Union Territory, Chandigarh ...Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. PRESENT: Mr. Sandeep Dhiman, Advocate for the appellant. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. This appeal as well as the application for condonation of 1889 days' delay are dismissed. For reasons, see the judgment of even date recorded in RFA No. 2248 of 2009 (Karan Singh v. Union Territory, Chandigarh). August 25, 2009 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) gbs JUDGE