R. F. A No. 3809 of 2006 1
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
R. F. A No. 3809 of 2006 (O&M)
Date of decision : 10.11.2008
State of Punjab ... Appellant
vs
Manjit Singh and another .... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. D. V. Sharma, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Harit Sharma, Advocate, for the appellant.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The State has approached this court through the present appeal
for reduction in the compensation.
Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 31.12.1993,
issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the
Act’), the State of Punjab, acquired 61 kanals 7 marlas of land in Village
Balongi, for public purpose namely for construction of road in the area of
Tehsil Mohali, District Ropar. The Land Acquisition Collector vide award
dated 16.8.1996 assessed the value of the acquired land at Rs. 5,46,238/- per
acre upto depth of 2 acres, Rs. 4,36,000/- per acre beyond 2 acres and Rs.
2,35,000/- per acre for nadi land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Land
Acquisition Collector, the landowners/claimants filed objections. On
reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award
dated 20.1.2006, determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs.
7,80,000/- per acre upto depth of 2 acres, Rs. 6,24,000/- per acre beyond 2
acres and Rs. 3,90,000/- per acre for nadi land.
The appeal was filed on 5.8.2006 along with an application for
condonation of 105 days delay in filing the appeal. Notice in the application
was issued on 16.10.2006 for 17.11.2006. As per report of service for the
date fixed, notices were not received back served or otherwise. Fresh
notices were directed to be issued for 29.3.2007. On 29.3.2007, the case was
adjourned to 17.8.2007. On 17.8.2007, it was reported that the respondents
R. F. A No. 3809 of 2006 2
are not residing at the given addresses. It was directed that fresh notices be
issued to them on furnishing of their correct addresses and the case was
adjourned to 7.12.2007. On 7.12.2007, learned counsel sought further time
to comply with the order dated 17.8.2007 and the case was adjourned to
21.4.2008. Thereafter the case was adjourned to 28.7.2008.
On 28.7.2008, this court considering repeated requests of
learned counsel for the appellant, seeking time to furnish addresses of the
respondents, passed the following order:-
“Office reports that notice could not be issued to
the respondents as the correct address was not filed.
Counsel for the appellant is directed to provide the
fresh correct address of the respondents within one
week. Thereafter fresh notice to issue for 11.8.2008.”
Thereafter again on 11.8.2008 as a matter of indulgence the
case was adjourned to 26.9.2008. On 26.9.2008, the case was adjourned for
today. Even till date nothing has been done in this regard.
Keeping in view the aforesaid conduct of the applicant/
appellant, it is evident that the applicant/appellant is not interested in
pursuing the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for non-
prosecution.
10.11.2008 ( Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge