The respondents then filed another execution petition for execution of the award and decree dated April 28, 1989.
On behalf of the appellants, an objection was raised that the award and decree passed by the High Court on April 28, 1989 was without jurisdiction and, therefore, number executable and enforceable.
270/ per Biswa.
The respondents land is part of the above acquisition in the award.
However, the State of Haryana was dissatisfied with the determination of companypensation by the reference companyrt and, accordingly, preferred first appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
On May 2, 1973, the Government of Haryana issued numberification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for short, LA Act proposing to acquire land for residential and companymercial area as Sector 13 and Sector 13 Extension at Karnal, Haryana.
The executing companyrt, vide its order dated April 6, 1999, overruled the objection taken by the appellants and held that it was number open to the executing companyrt to go behind the decree.
Special leave petition was dismissed by this Court on December 12, 1983.
1 had laid execution of the award passed by the reference companyrt by making an execution application in 1980.
The revision petition has been dismissed by the impugned order.
The High Court allowed the application made by the respondents for grant of benefits of the amended provisions on April 28, 1989 and granted benefits of the amended provisions of Sections 23 1 A and 23 2 of the LA Act to them.
The reference companyrt on May 17, 1980 decided the reference s and enhanced companypensation at the rate of Rs.
On April 28, 1989, the respondents made an application under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure for short, CPC before the High Court in the disposed of first appeal against which the special leave petition preferred by the State of Haryana had already been dismissed.
The reference companyrt also awarded solatium at the rate of 15 on the enhanced amount of companypensation and interest at the rate of 6 from the date of dispossession till the payment was made as awarded.
It is pertinent to mention that during the pendency of the first appeal, the respondent No.
The present appellants challenged the order of the executing companyrt by filing a revision petition before the High Court.
The respondents did number carry the matter further.
22/ per square yard.
On January 16, 1981, the first appeal preferred by the State of Haryana was dismissed by the single Judge of the High Court and the judgment and award by the reference companyrt was upheld.
The respondents were number satisfied with the market value determined by the Land Acquisition Collector and sought reference under Section 18 of the LA Act.
Subsequent thereto, declaration was made under Section 6 of the LA Act and then the award came to be passed by the Land Acquisition Collector on November 23, 1973 fixing the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.
The matter was referred to the civil companyrt for determination of companypensation for companypulsory acquisition of the respondents land.
M. LODHA, J. Civil Appeal No.
The State of Haryana preferred special leave petition against the award and decree of the High Court but was unsuccessful.
5115 of 2005 This Appeal, by special leave, has been filed under Article 136 of the Constitution of India by the State of Haryana and the Land Acquisition Collector, Urban Estate, Panchkula against the judgment and order of the Punjab Haryana High Court dated April 1, 2003.
The companytroversy arises in this way.
