RFA No. 72 of 2009 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
RFA No. 72 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of decision: 07.09.2009
Premo Devi and others
....Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana and others
....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA
Present: - Mr. Sandeep Panwar, Advocate,
for the appellants.
Mr. Rajeev Kawatra, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
*****
VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL)
CM No. 121-CI of 2009
For the reasons stated in the application, CM is allowed and
the persons named in para No. 1 of the application are ordered to be
brought on record as legal representatives of Sarup Chand and Smt.
Krishna, petitioners, subject to all just exceptions.
Office is directed to carry out necessary correction in the
memo of parties.
CM No. 120-CI of 2009
This application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has
been moved for condoning the delay of 536 days in filing the appeal.
The ground taken for condonation of delay reads as under: –
“That the appellants are simple and uneducational
person and father of appellant No. 1 to 5 namely Sarup
RFA No. 72 of 2009 (O&M)
-2-
Chand has given all the documents for filing the appeal
before this Hon’ble Court to one Mahavir Singh through
home the petitioner have engaged the counsel for filing
the reference under section 18 of land acquisition act
before the Ld. ADJ Kaithal, meanwhile Sh. Sarup Chand
fell ill and died on 27.3.2008 and Smt. Krishna i.e.
petitioner no. 2 also died on 22.4.2008. Sh. Sarup Chand
and Smt. Krishna were elders of their family and looking
after the case. The appellants remained under the
impression that appeal has been filed by Sh. Sarup
Chand i.e. father of appellant no. 1 to 5 and Smt. Krishna
i.e. mother of appellant no 6 to 10. But when the
appellants have got the notice of counter appeal filed by
the State Government fixed for 10.11.2008, before this
Hon’ble Court. They have enquired about their R.F.A.
which was supposed to be filed by Sh. Sarup Chand and
Smt. Krishna and the appellants have come to know that
R.F.A. By the appellants has not been filed. After that
they immediately contacted their counsel and filed the
present appeal without any further undue delay on their
part.”
The application is supported by an affidavit.
Notice of the application was given. No reply has been filed.
The averments made in the application go unrebutted.
For the reasons stated in the application, CM is allowed and
the delay of 536 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
RFA No. 72 of 2009
With the consent of the parties, the appeal is taken up for final
disposal.
It is not in dispute, that the appeal is squarely covered by the
decision of this Court in RFA No. 5466 of 2008 titled Kirpal Singh Vs.
RFA No. 72 of 2009 (O&M)
-3-
State of Haryana and others, decided on 27.3.2009.
In view of the decision of this Court in RFA No. 5466 of
2008 titled Kirpal Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others (supra), this
appeal is allowed, the impugned award is set aside and the case is
remanded back to the learned Reference Court for fresh consideration of
the evidence placed on record by the parties.
The parties through their counsel are directed to appear before
the learned District Judge, Kaithal, on 9.10.2009 for further proceedings.
The learned District Judge, Kaithal, shall be at liberty to either keep the
reference with him or entrust the same to any other Additional District
Judge. It is further directed that, the compensation already paid to the
appellant-land/owners in terms of the impugned award shall not be
recovered back from them in view of the setting aside of the award by
this Court. However, it shall abide by any final order passed by learned
Reference Court afresh.
(Vinod K. Sharma)
Judge
September 07, 2009
R.S.