R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: February 10, 2009
1. R. F. A. No. 3921 of 2007 (O&M)
Arunash Chander Kaushik and others ..... Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh .... Respondent
2. R. F. A. No. 336 of 2002 (O&M)
Smt. Harjinder Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
3. R. F. A. No. 818 of 2002 (O&M)
Gurbachan Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
4. R. F. A. No. 1726 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Gurbachan Singh …. Respondent
5. R. F. A. No. 1727 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Sukhpal Singh and another …. Respondents
6. R. F. A. No. 1728 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Harchal Singh …. Respondent
7. R. F. A. No. 1729 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Smt. Prem Lata …. Respondent
8. R. F. A. No. 1730 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Smt. Salochana Devi and another …. Respondents
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [2]
9. R. F. A. No. 1731 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Sandeep Dhiman and others …. Respondents
10. R. F. A. No. 1732 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Sanjiv Kumar …. Respondent
11. R. F. A. No. 1733 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Smt. Harjinder Kaur …. Respondent
12. R. F. A. No. 1734 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Kuldip Singh and another …. Respondents
13. R. F. A. No. 1803 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Sohan Singh …. Respondent
14. R. F. A. No. 1804 of 2002 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Rajiv Dhiman …. Respondent
15. R. F. A. No. 1923 of 2002 (O&M)
Harchal Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
16. R. F. A. No. 1924 of 2002 (O&M)
Smt. Prem Lata … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
17. R. F. A. No. 1925 of 2002 (O&M)
Rajiv Dhiman … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [3]
18. R. F. A. No. 1926 of 2002 (O&M)
Sandeep Dhiman and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
19. R. F. A. No. 1927 of 2002 (O&M)
Smt. Salochna Devi and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
20. R. F. A. No. 1928 of 2002 (O&M)
Sohan Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
21. R. F. A. No. 1929 of 2002 (O&M)
Sohan Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
22. R. F. A. No. 1930 of 2002 (O&M)
Sanjiv Kumar … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
23. R. F. A. No. 1931 of 2002 (O&M)
Sukhpal Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
24. R. F. A. No. 1935 of 2002 (O&M)
Harchal Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
25. R. F. A. No. 1963 of 2002 (O&M)
Gurbachan Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
26. R. F. A. No. 1964 of 2002 (O&M)
Gurcharan Singh (died) through LRs. … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [4]
27. R. F. A. No. 2016 of 2002 (O&M)
Jal Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
28. R. F. A. No. 2017 of 2002 (O&M)
Subash Chand Mittal and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
29. R. F. A. No. 2018 of 2002 (O&M)
Kuldip Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
30. R. F. A. No. 2019 of 2002 (O&M)
Smt. Mohini Sodhi … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
31. R. F. A. No. 2030 of 2002 (O&M)
Varinder Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
32. R. F. A. No. 2314 of 2002 (O&M)
Smt. Mumtaj and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
33. R. F. A. No. 2315 of 2002 (O&M)
Rajiv Dhiman … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
34. R. F. A. No. 2316 of 2002 (O&M)
Surinderpal Singh Grewal … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
35. R. F. A. No. 2317 of 2002 (O&M)
Anita … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [5]
36. R. F. A. No. 2318 of 2002 (O&M)
Puran Singh Rana … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
37. R. F. A. No. 2319 of 2002 (O&M)
Kuldip Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
38. R. F. A. No. 2324 of 2002 (O&M)
Bakhtawar Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
39. R. F. A. No. 2341 of 2002 (O&M)
Inderbir Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
40. R. F. A. No. 2349 of 2002 (O&M)
Sohan Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
41. R. F. A. No. 2350 of 2002 (O&M)
Labh Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
42. R. F. A. No. 2351 of 2002 (O&M)
Jagir Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
43. R. F. A. No. 2352 of 2002 (O&M)
Smt. Harjinder Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
44. R. F. A. No. 2353 of 2002 (O&M)
Naib Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [6]
45. R. F. A. No. 2354 of 2002 (O&M)
Pritam Singh (died) through LRs. and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
46. R. F. A. No. 2355 of 2002 (O&M)
Rajinder Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
47. R. F. A. No. 2491 of 2002 (O&M)
Subhash and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
48. R. F. A. No. 2507 of 2002 (O&M)
Amarjit Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
49. R. F. A. No. 2634 of 2002 (O&M)
Chhaja Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
50. R. F. A. No. 2768 of 2002 (O&M)
Baba Mal Dass Charitable Trust … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
51. R. F. A. No. 2769 of 2002 (O&M)
Harchal Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
52. R. F. A. No. 2770 of 2002 (O&M)
Paul Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
53. R. F. A. No. 2771 of 2002 (O&M)
Ajay Pal Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [7]
54. R. F. A. No. 2772 of 2002 (O&M)
Bal Krishan Sharma … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
55. R. F. A. No. 2773 of 2002 (O&M)
Rajinder Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
56. R. F. A. No. 3027 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 29/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Charan Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
57. R. F. A. No. 3028 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 28/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Jawala Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
58. R. F. A. No. 3029 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 21/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Dharam Paul Gupta … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
59. R. F. A. No. 3030 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 9/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Kaka Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
60. R. F. A. No. 3031 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 44/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Tirlochan Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
61. R. F. A. No. 3032 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 25/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Sadhu Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [8]
62. R. F. A. No. 3033 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 27/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Gurcharan Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
63. R. F. A. No. 3034 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 14/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Gurcharan Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
64. R. F. A. No. 3035 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 26/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Sadhu Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
65. R. F. A. No. 3036 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 65/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Jagir Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
66. R. F. A. No. 3037 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 41/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Surkhjit Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
67. R. F. A. No. 3038 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 18/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Rajinder Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
68. R. F. A. No. 3039 of 2002 (O&M)
Smt. Achhro Devi and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
69. R. F. A. No. 3042 of 2002 (O&M)
Iqbal Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [9]
70. R. F. A. No. 3043 of 2002 (O&M)
Gurnam Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
71. R. F. A. No. 3044 of 2002 (O&M)
Gurnam Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
72. R. F. A. No. 3045 of 2002 (O&M)
Bhajan Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
73. R. F. A. No. 3046 of 2002 (O&M)
Bhajan Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
74. R. F. A. No. 3047 of 2002 (O&M)
Bhajan Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
75. R. F. A. No. 3048 of 2002 (O&M)
Kuldip Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
76. R. F. A. No. 3079 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 35/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Jaspal Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
77. R. F. A. No. 3080 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 45/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Anil Malhotra and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
78. R. F. A. No. 3081 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 12/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Shamsher Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [10]
79. R. F. A. No. 3082 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 17/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Tajinder Kaur and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
80. R. F. A. No. 3229 of 2002 (O&M)
Surjit Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
81. R. F. A. No. 3230 of 2002 (O&M)
Bhag Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
82. R. F. A. No. 3234 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 108/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Sukhdev Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
83. R. F. A. No. 3235 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 58/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Baldev Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
84. R. F. A. No. 3282 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 68/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Kulwant Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
85. R. F. A. No. 3404 of 2002 (O&M)
Dev Singh (died) through LRs and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
86. R. F. A. No. 3427 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 22/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Tajinder Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [11]
87. R. F. A. No. 3468 of 2002 (O&M)
Bhupinder Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
88. R. F. A. No. 3473 of 2002 (O&M)
Bhajan Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
89. R. F. A. No. 3500 of 2002 (O&M)
Jagdish Kumar and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
90. R. F. A. No. 3517 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 66/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Satnam Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
91. R. F. A. No. 3518 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 57/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Kanta Devi … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
92. R. F. A. No. 3519 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 33/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Gurdip Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
93. R. F. A. No. 3570 of 2002 (O&M)
Parvesh Kumari and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
94. R. F. A. No. 3773 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 94/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Inderbir Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [12]
95. R. F. A. No. 3802 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 52/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Jeet Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
96. R. F. A. No. 3803 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 37/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Inderbir Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
97. R. F. A. No. 3804 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 62/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Bhag Kaur and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
98. R. F. A. No. 3805 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 32/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Manjit Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
99. R. F. A. No. 3828 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 10/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Gian Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
100. R. F. A. No. 3829 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 38/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Kamlesh Gupta … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
101. R. F. A. No. 3830 of 2002 (O&M)
Balbir Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
102. R. F. A. No. 3831 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 46/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Darshan Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [13]
103. R. F. A. No. 3832 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 20/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Bhupinder Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
104. R. F. A. No. 3833 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 67/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Bhupinder Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
105. R. F. A. No. 3834 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 109/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Sarabjit Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
106. R. F. A. No. 3835 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 63/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Nachhittar Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
107. R. F. A. No. 3836 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 34/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Kuldeep Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
108. R. F. A. No. 3984 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 56/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Satwinder Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
109. R. F. A. No. 3985 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 16/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Harminder Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
110. R. F. A. No. 3986 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 61/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Gurmukh Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [14]
111. R. F. A. No. 3987 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 55/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Gurdev Singh (died) through LRs. and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
112. R. F. A. No. 3988 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 40/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Naiyya and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
113. R. F. A. No. 3989 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 53/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Kuldip Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
114. R. F. A. No. 3996 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 43/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Rakesh Kumar … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
115. R. F. A. No. 3997 of 2002 (O&M)
Bakhtawar Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
116. R. F. A. No. 3998 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 51/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Sandeep Dhiman and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
117. R. F. A. No. 3999 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 116/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Raj Rani and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
118. R. F. A. No. 4000 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 15/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Prem Lata and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [15]
119. R. F. A. No. 4009 of 2002 (O&M)
Civil Panchayat Deh, Kumbra … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
120. R. F. A. No. 4010 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 30/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Suraj Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
121. R. F. A. No. 4023 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 39/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Sukhjinder Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
122. R. F. A. No. 4046 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 80/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Ramji Dass and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
123. R. F. A. No. 4117 of 2002 and
Cross-objection No. 31/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Satwinder Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
124. R. F. A. No. 4199 of 2002 (O&M)
Smt. Amarjit Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
125. R. F. A. No. 4200 of 2002 (O&M)
Bachna … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
126. R. F. A. No. 103 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 19/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Charan Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [16]
127. R. F. A. No. 139 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 54/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Rupinder Kaur and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
128. R. F. A. No. 144 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 49/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Baldev Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
129. R. F. A. No. 819 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 23/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Amrik Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
130. R. F. A. No. 845 of 2003 (O&M)
Ram Sarup … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
131. R. F. A. No. 851 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 60/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Charan Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
132. R. F. A. No. 1052 of 2003 (O&M)
Mohan Lal and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
133. R. F. A. No. 1094 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 95/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Narata Ram and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
134. R. F. A. No. 1095 of 2003 (O&M)
Shamlat Deh Hasab Rasad Zar Khewat … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [17]
135. R. F. A. No. 1096 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 24/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Sat Paul Gupta … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
136. R. F. A. No. 1150 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration … Appellant
vs
Bhupinder Singh …. Respondent
137. R. F. A. No. 1151 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration … Appellant
vs
Sohan Singh and others …. Respondents
138. R. F. A. No. 1152 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration … Appellant
vs
Surjit Singh and others …. Respondents
139. R. F. A. No. 1153 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration … Appellant
vs
Chhajja Singh and others …. Respondents
140. R. F. A. No. 1154 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration … Appellant
vs
Bhag Singh and others …. Respondents
141. R. F. A. No. 1155 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration … Appellant
vs
Jagdish Kumar and others …. Respondents
142. R. F. A. No. 1156 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration … Appellant
vs
Mohan Lal and others …. Respondents
143. R. F. A. No. 1345 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 89/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Gurmit Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [18]
144. R. F. A. No. 1556 of 2003
Cross-objection No. 93/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Smt. Charan Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
145. R. F. A. No. 2572 of 2003 (O&M)
Jawala Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
146. R. F. A. No. 2573 of 2003 (O&M)
Gurcharan Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
147. R. F. A. No. 2574 of 2003 (O&M)
Lal Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
148. R. F. A. No. 2575 of 2003 (O&M)
Dilbagh Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
149. R. F. A. No. 3902 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 72/CI of 2008 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Amarjit Singh …. Respondent
150. R. F. A. No. 3903 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 74/CI of 2008 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Dalminder Singh …. Respondent
151. R. F. A. No. 3904 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 73/CI of 2008 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Harminder Singh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [19]
152. R. F. A. No. 3905 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 146/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Jaswant Singh and others …. Respondents
153. R. F. A. No. 3906 of 2003 and
Cross-objection No. 142/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Champa Devi and others …. Respondents
154. R. F. A. No. 3907 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Dilbagh Singh …. Respondent
155. R. F. A. No. 3908 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Gurcharan Singh …. Respondent
156. R. F. A. No. 3909 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Lal Singh and others …. Respondents
157. R. F. A. No. 3910 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Bhajan Singh and others …. Respondents
158. R. F. A. No. 3911 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Tarlok Singh and others …. Respondents
159. R. F. A. No. 3912 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Leela Devi and others …. Respondents
160. R. F. A. No. 3913 of 2003 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Hazura Singh (died) and others …. Respondents
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [20]
161. R. F. A. No. 4547 of 2003 (O&M)
Rulia … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
162. R. F. A. No. 4620 of 2003 (O&M)
Gurmel Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
163. R. F. A. No. 4621 of 2003 (O&M)
Joginder Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
164. R. F. A. No. 4622 of 2003 (O&M)
Achhar Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
165. R. F. A. No. 4623 of 2003 (O&M)
Gurdial Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
166. R. F. A. No. 4624 of 2003 (O&M)
Tej Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
167. R. F. A. No. 4735 of 2003 (O&M)
Ramesh Kumar … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
168. R. F. A. No. 4736 of 2003 (O&M)
Daljit Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
169. R. F. A. No. 4737 of 2003 (O&M)
Karan Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [21]
170. R. F. A. No. 4755 of 2003 (O&M)
Dharam Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
171. R. F. A. No. 4756 of 2003 (O&M)
Smt. Ishar Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
172. R. F. A. No. 4757 of 2003 (O&M)
Randip Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
173. R. F. A. No. 4758 of 2003 (O&M)
Padam Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
174. R. F. A. No. 4759 of 2003 (O&M)
Bikram Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
175. R. F. A. No. 4760 of 2003 (O&M)
Bhim Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
176. R. F. A. No. 4761 of 2003 (O&M)
Dharam Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
177. R. F. A. No. 4762 of 2003 (O&M)
Bakshish Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
178. R. F. A. No. 4763 of 2003 (O&M)
Karnail Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [22]
179. R. F. A. No. 54 of 2004 (O&M)
Bakshish Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
180. R. F. A. No. 194 of 2004 (O&M)
Surjit Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
181. R. F. A. No. 202 of 2004 (O&M)
Amrik Singh (died) through LRs and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
182. R. F. A. No. 207 of 2004 (O&M)
Kulwinder Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
183. R. F. A. No. 314 of 2004 (O&M)
Ajmer Kaur … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
184. R. F. A. No. 320 of 2004 (O&M)
Karnail Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
185. R. F. A. No. 321 of 2004 (O&M)
Kuldip Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
186. R. F. A. No. 322 of 2004 (O&M)
Satya … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
187. R. F. A. No. 323 of 2004 (O&M)
Jaspal Kaur and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [23]
188. R. F. A. No. 324 of 2004 (O&M)
Jaspal Kaur and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
189. R. F. A. No. 350 of 2004 (O&M)
Prem Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India and others …. Respondents
190. R. F. A. No. 355 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Achhar Singh …. Respondent
191. R. F. A. No. 356 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Randip Singh …. Respondent
192. R. F. A. No. 357 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Karnail Singh and others …. Respondents
193. R. F. A. No. 358 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Dharam Singh …. Respondent
194. R. F. A. No. 359 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Bakhshish Singh and others …. Respondents
195. R. F. A. No. 360 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Tej Kaur and another …. Respondents
196. R. F. A. No. 361 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Ram Kaur and others …. Respondents
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [24]
197. R. F. A. No. 362 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Ramesh Kumar …. Respondent
198. R. F. A. No. 363 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Daljit Singh and others …. Respondents
199. R. F. A. No. 364 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Jaswant Singh and others …. Respondents
200. R. F. A. No. 365 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Prem Singh and others …. Respondents
201. R. F. A. No. 366 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Sukhbir Singh …. Respondent
202. R. F. A. No. 367 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Jumla Malkan …. Respondent
203. R. F. A. No. 368 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Smt. Ishar Kaur …. Respondent
204. R. F. A. No. 369 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Leela Devi and others …. Respondents
205. R. F. A. No. 370 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Bhim Singh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [25]
206. R. F. A. No. 371 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Mohinder Singh and others …. Respondents
207. R. F. A. No. 372 of 2004 and
Cross-objection no. 141/CI of 2006 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Karam Singh …. Respondent
208. R. F. A. No. 373 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Kehar Singh …. Respondent
209. R. F. A. No. 374 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Babu Singh and others …. Respondents
210. R. F. A. No. 375 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Nar Singh …. Respondent
211. R. F. A. No. 376 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Gurdial Singh …. Respondent
212. R. F. A. No. 377 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Harbans Singh and others …. Respondents
213. R. F. A. No. 378 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Bikram Singh …. Respondent
214. R. F. A. No. 379 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Padam Singh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [26]
215. R. F. A. No. 380 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Kuldip Singh and others …. Respondents
216. R. F. A. No. 381 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Karnail Singh …. Respondent
217. R. F. A. No. 382 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Dharam Singh and others …. Respondents
218. R. F. A. No. 383 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Gram Panchayat Deh …. Respondent
219. R. F. A. No. 384 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Bakshish Singh …. Respondent
220. R. F. A. No. 385 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Shamlat Deh of Village Nizampur Kumbra …. Respondent
221. R. F. A. No. 386 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Pritam Kaur …. Respondent
222. R. F. A. No. 387 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh … Appellant
vs
Gurmel Singh …. Respondent
223. R. F. A. No. 473 of 2004 (O&M)
Mohinder Singh and others … Appellants
vs
U. T. , Chandigarh …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [27]
224. R. F. A. No. 494 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Harbans Singh and others …. Respondents
225. R. F. A. No. 495 of 2004 (O&M)
Union of India … Appellant
vs
Karan Singh and others …. Respondents
226. R. F. A. No. 730 of 2004 and
Cross-objection No. 144/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Mohinder Kaur (since deceased) through LRs and another …. Respondent
227. R. F. A. No. 731 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Sarjant Singh and others …. Respondents
228. R. F. A. No. 732 of 2004 and
Cross-objection no. 166/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Sarwan Singh …. Respondent
229. R. F. A. No. 733 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Sandeep Kumar …. Respondent
230. R. F. A. No. 734 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Ajit Singh Kalra and another …. Respondents
231. R. F. A. No. 735 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Bachna …. Respondent
232. R. F. A. No. 736 of 2004 and
Cross-objection no. 145/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Teja Singh (since deceased) through LRs. …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [28]
233. R. F. A. No. 737 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Gurdev Singh …. Respondent
234. R. F. A. No. 738 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Mohinder Kaur …. Respondent
235. R. F. A. No. 739 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Gurmit Singh and others …. Respondents
236. R. F. A. No. 740 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Bakhtawar Singh and others …. Respondents
237. R. F. A. No. 741 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Smt. Surjit Kaur …. Respondent
238. R. F. A. No. 742 of 2004 and
Cross-objection no. 152/CI of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Sewa Singh …. Respondent
239. R. F. A. No. 869 of 2004 and
Cross-objection no. 77/CI of 2005 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Shamlat Deh of Moja Nizampur Burail …. Respondent
240. R. F. A. No. 870 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Swaran Kaur and others …. Respondents
241. R. F. A. No. 889 of 2004 (O&M)
Leela Devi and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India and others …. Respondents
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [29]
242. R. F. A. No. 1019 of 2004 (O&M)
Sumeet Kumar and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
243. R. F. A. No. 1187 of 2004 (O&M)
Amarjit Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
244. R. F. A. No. 1578 of 2004 (O&M)
Bikram Singh and another ` … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
245. R. F. A. No. 1579 of 2004 (O&M)
Satpal Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
246. R. F. A. No. 1580 of 2004 (O&M)
Anil Kumar and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
247. R. F. A. No. 1581 of 2004 (O&M)
Narinder Singh and another … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
248. R. F. A. No. 1682 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Smt. Surkhjit Kaur …. Respondent
249. R. F. A. No. 1683 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Sukhjinder Singh and another …. Respondents
250. R. F. A. No. 1684 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Mrs. Mohini Sodhi …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [30]
251. R. F. A. No. 1686 of 2004 and
Cross-objection no. 22/CI of 2005 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Smt. Ajaib Kaur …. Respondent
252. R. F. A. No. 1687 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Niranjan Singh …. Respondent
253. R. F. A. No. 1688 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Gurdev Singh …. Respondent
254. R. F. A. No. 1689 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Gian Singh …. Respondent
255. R. F. A. No. 1690 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Bant Singh …. Respondent
256. R. F. A. No. 1691 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Rajinder Singh and another …. Respondents
257. R. F. A. No. 1692 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Sher Singh …. Respondent
258. R. F. A. No. 1693 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Harjinder Singh …. Respondent
259. R. F. A. No. 1788 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Charan Singh and others …. Respondents
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [31]
260. R. F. A. No. 2329 of 2004 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Varun Bedi …. Respondent
261. R. F. A. No. 422 of 2005 (O&M)
Prabhsharan Kaur and others … Appellants
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
262. R. F. A. No. 564 of 2005 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur Dosanjh …. Respondent
263. R. F. A. No. 603 of 2005 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Rohit Singla and another …. Respondents
264. R. F. A. No. 2075 of 2005 (O&M)
Gurdial Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
265. R. F. A. No. 2120 of 2005 (O&M)
Karnail Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
266. R. F. A. No. 2121 of 2005 (O&M)
Dharam Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
267. R. F. A. No. 2122 of 2005 (O&M)
Bakhshish Singh … Appellant
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
268. R. F. A. No. 2123 of 2005 (O&M)
Karnail Singh and others … Appellants
vs
Union of India …. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [32]
269. R. F. A. No. 1862 of 2006 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Som Nath …. Respondent
270. R. F. A. No. 1863 of 2006 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Bhupinder Singh …. Respondent
271. R. F. A. No. 3249 of 2006 (O&M)
Union of India …. Appellant
vs
Sukhdev Singh and others …. Respondents
272. R. F. A. No. 1811 of 2007 (O&M)
Gurdial Singh … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
273. R. F. A. No. 2365 of 2007 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Pawan Kumar Bansal …. Respondent
274. R. F. A. No. 2392 of 2007 (O&M)
Pawan Kumar Bansal … Appellant
vs
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Respondent
275. R. F. A. No. 3394 of 2007 (O&M)
Union Territory, Chandigarh …. Appellant
vs
Arunash Chander Kaushik and others …. Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: S/ Shri P. C. Dhiman, D.S.Raghu, R. K. Dhiman, Pritam Saini,
Rajesh Kumar and Naresh Kaushal, Advocates for the
appellants.
S/Shri Deepak Sharma, Vishal Sodhi, Sanjiv Ghai, Gurinderjit
Singh and Mrs. Lisa Gill, Advocates for Union Territory,
Chandigarh
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [33]
Rajesh Bindal J.
This order will dispose of a bunch of 275 appeals, as the same arise
out of a common acquisition.
R.F.A. Nos. 336, 818, 1923 to 1931, 1935, 1963 1964, 2016 to 2019,
2030, 2314 to 2319, 2324, 2341, 2349 to 2355, 2491, 2507, 2634, 2768 to 2773,
3027 to 3039, 3042 to 3048, 3079, 3080 to 3082, 3229, 3230, 3234, 3235, 3282,
3404, 3427, 3468, 3473, 3500, 3517 to 3519, 3570, 3773, 3802 to 3805, 3828 to
3836, 3984 to 3989, 3996 to 4000, 4009, 4010, 4023, 4046, 4117, 4199 and 4200
of 2002, 103, 139, 144, 819, 845, 851, 1052, 1094 to 1096, 1345, 1556, 2572 to
2575, 4547, 4620 to 4624, 4735 to 4737, 4755 to to 4763 of 2003, 54, 194, 202,
207, 314, 320 to 324, 350, 473, 889, 1019, 1187, 1578 to 1581 of 2004, 422, 2075,
2120, 2121 to 2123 of 2005, 1811, 2392 and 3921 of 2007 have been filed by the
land owners seeking further enhancement of compensation.
R.F.A. Nos. 1726 to 1734, 1803, 1804 of 2002, 1150 to 1156 of
2003, 3902 to 3913 of 2003, 355 to 387, 494, 495, 730 to 742, 869,870, 1682 to
1684, 1686 to 1693, 1788, 2329 of 2004, 564 and 603 of 2005, 1862, 1863 and
3249 of 2006, 2365 and 3394 of 2007 have been filed by Union Territory,
Chandigarh seeking reduction of compensation on account of acquisition of land.
In R.F.A. Nos. 3027 to 3038 of 2002, 3079 to 3082, 3234, 3235,
3282, 3427, 3517 to 3519, 3773, 3802 to 3805, 3828, 3829, 3831 to 3836, 3984 to
3989, 3996, 3998 to 4000, 4010, 4023, 4046 and 4117 of 2002, 103, 139, 144,
819, 851, 1094, 1096, 1345, 1556, 3902 to 3906 of 2003, cross objections have
been filed by Union Territory, Chandigarh seeking reduction of compensation
awarded to the land owners.
In R.F.A. Nos. 372, 730, 732, 736, 742, 869 and 1686 of 2004 cross
objections have been filed by the land owners seeking further enhancement of
compensation.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that Chandigarh Administration vide
notification dated 20.8.1998, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,
1894 (for short, `the Act’), acquired 182.87 acres of land forming part of the
revenue estate of villages Nizampur Burail, Nizampur Kumbra, Kajheri and
Jhumroo for development of third phase of Chandigarh. The same was followed
by notification dated 16.11.1998, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land
Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector’) assessed the market value of the
land at Rs. 8,28,750/- per acre for village Nizampur Kumbra; Rs. 8,18,573/- per
acre for village Kajheri, Rs. 7,71,735/- per acre for village Nizampur Burail and
Rs. 4,98,102/- per acre for village Jhumroo. The land owners feeling dissatisfied
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [34]
with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Collector, filed objections. On
reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market
value of the acquired land in all the villages at Rs. 13,44,000/- per acre. For low
lying area as Khadan, Gair Mumkin Nadi and Choe, the learned court below
assessed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 5,59,992/- per acre.
Learned counsels for the land owners submitted that acquisition in
the present case was made vide notification dated 20.8.1998. The acquisition was
for the purpose of development of third phase of Chandigarh. About one year prior
to the acquisition in the present case, a large chunk of land pertaining to the same
villages was acquired. The issue regarding determination of compensation for the
land earlier acquired vide notification dated 3.7.1997 was subject matter of appeal
before this Court in R.F.A. No. 727 of 2001 –Narinder Singh v. Union Territory,
Chandigarh, decided on 4.2.2009, whereby this Court assessed the value of the
acquired land therein at Rs. 15,46,450/- per acre. They further submitted that in
the present case, the learned court below had assessed the value of the acquired
land relying upon the award pertaining to the earlier acquisition carried out vide
notification dated 3.7.1997 and had granted increase @ 12% thereon, considering
the fact that there was a gap of one year, one month and 17 days in the two
acquisitions. The submission is that this Court having further enhanced
compensation payable for the acquisition carried out vide notification dated
3.7.1997, the land owners should be granted increased compensation for the
present acquisition accordingly.
Another submission raised is that the learned court below has gone
wrong in not granting same compensation for the entire acquired land and holding
some part of the land to be low lying as Khadan, Gair Mumkin Nadi and Choe.
The compensation therefor was assessed at a lower rate which was not required to
be done, as all the land owners were required to be paid the same amount of
compensation. It is for the reason that after acquisition, the land was transferred
by Chandigarh Administration to the Cooperative Societies by specially
mentioning therein that Chandigarh Administration will not be liable to level the
uneven land. There different rate was not fixed for the low lying area. They
referred to the statement of PW3- Jasbir Singh.
As far as determination of value of fruit bearing trees is concerned,
learned counsel for the land owners submitted that the same having been assessed
strictly in terms of the judgment of this Court while granting percentage increase
in proportionate to the increase in the price index, the determination of
compensation by the learned Reference Court being in conformity with the earlier
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [35]
judgments of this Court, the claim for further increase therein does not survive. As
regards super structure, the submission is that the learned Reference Court has
granted only the value of the super structure, as was determined by the Collector
without granting any further increase thereon, which is not in conformity with the
judgments of this Court, wherein it has been opined that the land owners are
entitled to increase @ 25% on the value of the super structure, as is assessed by the
Collector.
As far as assessment of Rs. 3,000/- made by the learned court below,
on account of some kacha room, learned counsel for the land owners submitted
that they are not claiming any further increase thereon.
Learned counsels for Union Territory submitted that in the absence
of any independent evidence on record, the land owners should not be granted any
further increase in the value of land, as assessed by the learned Reference Court,
rather, even that amount deserves to be reduced. In fact, the award of the Collector
deserves to be upheld and the amount awarded by the learned court below be set
aside. It was further submitted that as far as the claim made by the land owners
with regard to categorisation of land as Khadan, Gair Mumkin Nadi and Choe is
concerned, the same is not tenable on the basis of the material produced on record
by the land owners. The quality of the land was determined in terms of the entries
in the revenue record, to which presumption of truth is attached. To rebut the
entries in the revenue records, the land owners merely produced oral evidence,
which was also self contradictory. The findings of the Collector having not been
rebutted successfully, the land owners should not be granted the same
compensation, as is determined for the land which is of good quality and at normal
level. The value of the land, which is part of Nadi or Choe or which are Khadans
is certainly less as compared to the other land. It is the price which a normal buyer
is ready to pay to the seller which can be claimed by the land owners as
compensation. There is no question of unjust enrichment in the process. The fact
that the land was ultimately sold at the same rate is not relevant for the purpose of
consideration of the issue regarding valuation of the land on the date of
acquisition.
It was further submitted that in certain appeals, the land owners have
restricted their claim for enhancement to the extent of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre. In
case this court comes to the conclusion that the land owners are entitled to further
enhancement in the value of the acquired land, the entitlement of those land
owners should be restricted to the claim made by them.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [36]
As far as the valuation of acquired land is concerned, I need not go
into much details in the present set of appeals for the reason that the value of land
pertaining to the same villages acquired for the same purpose vide notification
dated 3.7.1997 has already been determined by this Court in Narinder Singh’s case
(supra). The acquisition in the present case being one year, one month and 17 days
thereafter, the land owners herein can certainly be granted increase for this
intervening period. Even in the earlier case, the land owners were granted increase
for the time gap in the notifications, while noticing the fact in detail that there had
been appreciation of value of land during the intervening period. The learned
court below granted 12% increase for this intervening period, relying upon the
value as assessed for acquisition of land vide notification dated 3.7.1997.
Accordingly, I also apply the same principle and on the value of the land assessed
for the acquisition carried out vide notification dated 3.7.1997 in Narinder Singh’s
case (supra) at Rs. 15,46,450/- per acre, increase of 12% thereon is granted and
adding Rs. 1,85,574/- therein, the value of the acquired land herein comes out to
Rs. 17,32,024/- per acre, which is rounded off to Rs. 17,32,000/- per acre.
Accordingly, the land owners are held entitled to compensation @ Rs. 17,32,000/-
per acre for the land except which is recorded as gair mumkin Nadi, Choe and
Khadan.
As far as different valuation of the land which is recorded as Gair
Mumkin Nadi, Choe and Khadan in the revenue records is concerned, in my
opinion, sufficient evidence has not been brought on record by the land owners to
rebut the findings recorded by the Collector. A regular survey of the area is
conducted and khasra girdawaris are prepared. The Collector had recorded the
quality of the land on the basis of khasra girdawaris for Rabi/Kharif, 1998. The
acquisition in the present case was also carried out in the year 1998. It was
recorded in the khasra girdawaris that some part of the land pertaining to villages
Nizampur Kumbra and Nizampur Burail was Gair Mumkin Nadi, Choe and
Khadan. Considering the deficiency in the value of this quality of land, the learned
Reference Court assessed less amount as compensation for the acquisition thereof
which is Rs. 5,59,992/- per acre. Learned counsel for the land owners have merely
referred to the statement of PW3-Jasbir Singh to show that the entire land was of
one level, which was quite close to the road level. However, this witness in his
cross-examination admitted that there may be some low lying area. In fact, he
demolished his statement made in the examination-in-chief, where he stated that
the entire land was of same level. The quality of land is evident from the revenue
records. There being no documentary evidence on record, the findings recorded by
R.F.A. No. 3921 of 2007 [37]
the learned court below on the quality of land cannot be faulted with. As far as
value thereof is concerned, the learned Reference Court had determined the same
at Rs. 5,59,992/- per acre, in comparison to the value of other land which was
determined at Rs. 13,44,000/- per acre. As the value of other land has been
enhanced by this Court to Rs. 17,32,000/- per acre, in the same proportion, the
value of the land which is recorded as Gair Mumkin Nadi, Choe and Khadan is
enhanced and the same comes out to Rs. 7,21,656/- per acre, which is rounded off
to Rs. 7,21,700/- per acre.
As far as the claim made by learned counsel for Union Territory
regarding restricting of claim made by the land owners in the appeals before this
Court is concerned, I do not find any merit in the submissions made. In Bhimasha
v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another, (2008) 10 SCC 797, the issue
under consideration before Hon’ble the Supreme Court was as to whether the claim
for enhancement is to be restricted to the amount claimed in the memo of appeal,
where Hon’ble the Supreme Court opined that the appellant’s omission to make
appropriate claim after paying the requisite court fee cannot be castigated as one
lacking bonafide. It was further opined that the land owners therein would be
entitled to the same amount of compensation, as was determined payable to other
land owners. However, the same shall be subject to payment of court fee.
Accordingly, in the present appeals also, where appropriate amount of court fee
has not been paid, the award of the enhanced amount in favour of the land owners
shall be subject to payment of difference of court fee.
The appeals and cross-objections are disposed of in the above terms.
(Rajesh Bindal)
Judge
February 10, 2009
mk