L.P.A. No. 256 of 2008 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH L.P.A. No. 256 of 2008 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 5.8.2009 Brij Mohan Sagar & another ..........Appellants Versus State of Haryana & another ..........Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. Shailendra Jain, Advocate, Shri Adarsh Jain, Advocate, Shri Ajay Kaushik, Advocate and Shri A.P. Bhandari, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Rameshwar Malik, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for the respondents. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral) 1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment of learned Single Judge dated 5.2.2001. The appeal was filed in time but returned with objections. Thereafter the same has been re-filed on October 17, 2008 i.e. after more than seven years from the date of the said judgment. On 24.10.2008, notice was issued on application for condonation of 2666 days in refilling the appeal. The ground mentioned on application for condonation of delay is that the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 27.10.2004 passed in Civil Appeal No. 9808 of 2003 titled as 'Vinod Bansal Vs. State of Haryana & Anr., 2004 (11) SCC 408 L.P.A. No. 256 of 2008 (O&M) (2) remanded the issue of determination of compensation relating to land involved in the same acquisition to the Reference Court setting aside the impugned judgment of learned Single Judge. It is stated that the appeal was filed within the period of limitation but was returned with certain objections and thereafter the same could not be refilled. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Land in question was acquired in pursuance of notification dated 7.9.1992 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') for residential, commercial and institutional sectors at Faridabad. The Collector determined compensation vide award dated 8.2.1995. The Reference Court vide judgment dated 12.1.1998 enhanced the compensation to Rs. 325/- per square yard. On appeal of the State, learned Single Judge while disposing of 385 first appeals reduced the compensation to Rs. 90/- per square yard on 7.7.1999 in RFA No. 1346 of 1998 (Manjit Singh Boparai Vs. State of Haryana & Anr.). On further appeal, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, referring to the earlier conflict of decisions on interpretation of Section 51-A in Special Deputy Collector Vs. Kurra Sambasive Rao, 1997 (6) SCC 41 and Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer Vs. V. Narasaiah (2001) 3 SCC 530, which was resolved in Cement Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Purya, 2004 (8) SCC 270, remanded the matter for fresh disposal. 4. Having regard to the fact that the issue of determination of compensation is pending consideration in matters arising out of the same acquisition and appellants had initially filed the appeals in time, though strictly speaking there is no sufficient ground for condonation of delay, we consider it appropriate, in the interest of justice, that this appeal be entertained. Delay condoned. Heard on merits. 5. In view of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vinod Bansal (supra), we set aside the judgment of learned Single Judge and L.P.A. No. 256 of 2008 (O&M) (3) remand the matters to the Reference Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. 7. The appeal is disposed of. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE August 05, 2009 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No