Civil Revision No.4544 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M.No.129-CII of 2011 and Civil Revision No.4544 of 2010 Date of Decision 12.01.2011 Kashmir Singh ...... Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab and others ...... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Avnish Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Sandeep Moudgill, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents-State. Mr.Rajeshwar Singh, Advocate, for the applicant. ***** A.N.JINDAL, J: C.M.No.129-CII of 2011 No grounds for impleading Gram Panchayat, Hasto Kalan, as party-respondent, are made out. Dismissed. Civil Revision No.4544 of 2010 This petition assails the order dated 28.05.2010, passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fazilka, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Order 21 Rule 32 CPC. The decree dated 28.11.2001, which became final, indicates that the Collector was to assess the compensation of the land within two months and to make the payment of compensation to the petitioner without going into the fact that the petition under Order 21 Rule 32 C.P.C. was Civil Revision No.4544 of 2010 2 maintainable. The respondents were bound to comply with the decree. The respondents had paid the amount. However, during the pendency of this petition, since this Court had directed the respondents to assess the compensation. Accordingly, compensation was assessed. Mr.Kamal Kishore Yadav, Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur, has filed the affidavit on behalf of respondent No.2. Para No.2 of the said affidavit reads as under:- “That in compliance to the orders of this Hon'ble Court, compensation of Rs.1,30,000/- per acre has been assessed. Before the assessment of the compensation of the land in question, the previous record pertaining to the period from 1998-99 to 2003-04 regarding the sale price of the village Jhangar, Bhaini was taken into consideration. True translated copy of the assessment order is annexed herewith as Annexure R-1.” Annexure R-1, placed on the record, also indicates that the price of the land has been assessed @ Rs.1,30,000/- per acre. There is nothing to show on the record that the Court was to proceed to assess the compensation as per provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. It was also not the intention of the petitioner-decree holder as the trial Court had directed the respondents to assess the compensation within two months. There is no such provision under the Land Acquisition Act to assess the compensation according to which the compensation could be assessed within two months. I find merit in the contention, raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Even according to the assessment order, he has not received the full amount. Civil Revision No.4544 of 2010 3 Faced with the situation, learned State counsel, on instructions from Shiv Kumar, XEN, Department of Rural Development and Panchayats, Punjab, states that the respondents would pay the balance amount of compensation. In view of aforesaid, this petition is disposed of with the direction that the respondents would comply the undertaking within two months from today, failing which the consequences would follow. However, this order will not bind the petitioner if he has any other remedy as provided under law. (A.N.Jindal) Judge 12.01.2011 mamta-II