HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL F.A. No. 143 of 2001 (Old F.A. No. 11 of 1993) State of U.P. ….Appellant. Vs Virendra Kumar Jain, S/o Sri Abhinandan Prasad Jain, Resident of Upper Bazar, Pauri Garhwal. ……Respondent. Sri Nand Prsad learned Standing Counsel for the appellant. Sri Vivek Shukla learned counsel for the respondent. Dated:-16-6-2006 Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. Heard Sri Nand Prasad learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Vivek Shukla learned counsel for the respondent. This appeal has been filed against the Judgment and decree passed by District Judge, Pauri Garhwal on 6-2-1991 in Original Suit No. 5 of 1990 Virender Kumar Vs. State of U.P. The learned District Judge has allowed the application under Section 23/28 A of the respondent Virender Kumar Jain on the ground that the Court on 3-12-1990 in Case No. 1 for 1990 Sukhbir Prasad Vs State of U.P. has passed the following order:- ^^lw[kohj izlkn tSu ,oa ohjsUnz dqekj us /kkjk &28¼,½¼3½ Hkwfe v/;kfir vf/kfu;e 1984 ds vUrxZr dySDVj }kjk bl vnkyr dks ;g fjQjsUl djkok;k gS fd blds gd es tks ,okMZ gks pqdk gS vkSj Hkwfe eqokbZtk fn;s tkus dk vkns’k gks pqdk gS mles og lg[kkrsnkj Fkk vkSj vU; lg[kkrsnkj xksfoUnflag rFkk /khjsUnz oxSjg ds jsQjsUl esa ftyk tt us 8-10-1985 dks viuk fu.kZ; ns fn;kA og fu.kZ; 4]000@:0 izfrukyh ds fglkc ls fn;k x;kA og fu.kZ; /kkjk 18 Hkwfe v?;kfIr vf/kfu;e ds vUrxZr fn;k x;k Fkk ysfdu blesa 615&38 :0 izfrukyh ds fglkc ls yS.M ,sD;wft’ku vfQlj us nh ftyk tt }kjk ;g tehu ,l0,l0oh0 Jh uxj dks vfHkO;Dr dh xbZ FkhA ftles vkns’k ;g gqvk fd izkFkhZx.k dk izkFkZuki= fnukad 1-1- 1986 o 1-12-1989 Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA izkFkhZx.k vk?;Ir Hkwfe dk izfrdj :04]000@¼pkj gtkj :I;s ek=½ izfrukyh ds fglkc ls o bl /kujkf’k ij 30 izfr’kr dh nj ls lksysfj;e o vk/;Ir Hkwfe ls izkFkhZx.k ds osn[ky gksus dh frfFk ls ,d lky dh vof/k rd 9 izfr’kr lkykuk dh nj ls O;kt o rri’pkr 15 izfr’kr dh nl ls O;kt Hkqxrku gksus dh frfFk rd ik;saxsA” It was further mentioned that vide Judgment dated 8-10-1985that the learned District Judge Sri D.L. Soni allowed the references No.1985, 3/1985 and 4/1985 and the compensation has been awarded at the rate of Rs. 4,000/-per Nali and 30 % Solatium with 9% interest has already been awarded and in other cases, the references No. 3 of 1990 filed by Chiranji Lal Gaidi Lal on 3-12-1990, the compensation has been awarded at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per Nali. Learned District Judge, Pauri Garhwal allowed the application of the respondent Virender Kumar Jain. The learned Standing Counsel could not point out any infirmity or irregularity in the impugned judgment, which may warrant any interference by this Court in appeal. In view of the above facts, the application was rightly allowed by the District Judge. There is no infirmity and irregularity in the impugned order. The appeal is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. (B.S. Verma, J) Dated: - 16-6- 2006 M.K.