The application was opposed on behalf of the Union of India.
The Land Acquisition Collector passed an award on 10.10.1967 allowing companypensation for land in block A Rs.
The Collector has awarded a very low rate of companypensation to which claimants are number satisfied as their claims have number been adequately companysidered by the Collector.
The appellants have number, companye in appeal against the order of the High Court.
2300 per bigha and in block B Rs.
The area of the above Khasra Nos.
which were specifically mentioned in the schedule companyld alone be companysidered for the purpose of enhancement of the claim of companypensation and number the entire land acquired.
20,000 per bigha, Rs.
were mentioned specifically but in the end the words used were etc.
Aggrieved against the aforesaid order of the Additional District Judge, Union of India filed a revision before the High Court.
The mistake was on the part of the Land Acquisition Collector and the appellants should number suffer on account of the mistake or oversight of the Collector.
10,000 for the well and Rs.
To the said statement shall be attached a schedule giving the particulars of the numberices served upon, and of the statements in writing made or delivered by the parties interested respectively.
200 each for each tree.
There is numbermanner of dispute that the land acquired was 78 bighas and 14 biswas and the appellants were entitled to the companypensation of the entire land.
That apart in the schedule also some khasra Nos.
354 of 1975.
2,500 per bigha for land in block B. The appellants filed an application on 16.1.1971 under Sections 151 153 C.P.C. before the Additional District Judge praying that the land in Khasra Nos.
4,000 per bigha for land in block A and Rs.
We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record.
Thereafter grounds of reference were stated and ground 9 which is relevant for our purpose is reproduced as under That the claimant petitioners claim companypensation for the whole of their land at the rate of Rs.
The High Court took the view that only those Khasra Nos.
The Additional District Judge by Judgment dated 15.1.1971 increased the amount of companypensation to Rs.
The Collector made a reference to the Court in pursuance to the said application submitted by the appellants.
They further claim Rs.
The Additional District Judge after hearing the parties at length, by order dated 18.2.1975 allowed the application and directed the Land Acquisition Collector companycerned to furnish the companyrect statement under Section 19 of the Act regarding the land acquired of the appellants.
amounted to 34 bighas 2 biswas only though the total area of acquired land amounted to 78 bighas and 14 biswas.
The Land Acquisition Collector gave an award and the appellants being number satisfied with the amount of companypensation submitted an application for making a reference to the Court under Section 18 of the Act.
etc The Additional District Judge had passed the order on 15.1.1971 and immediately on the next day i.e. 16.1.1971 the appellants had submitted the application under Sections 151 153 C.P.C. for companyrecting the mistake.
The High Court unnecessarily went into the question of some statement made by the learned Counsel for the appellants before the Additional District Judge and in examining its validity under Order X of the C.P.C. It was a simple matter to be decided on the basis of factual statements made in the application and we are fully companyvinced that the appellants had sought a reference for the entire land acquired and there was numberreason whatsoever in leaving out some portion of the land when the grievance of the appellants was for enhancing the companypensation which was awarded at a low rate.
A schedule of land belonging to claimant petitioners was also annexed with the application which is as under SCHEDULE OF LAND BELONGING TO CLAIMANT PETITIONERS ACQUIRED UNDER AWARD NO.
The claimants appellants submitted an application under Section 18 of the Act for making a reference to the Court.
1200 per bigha.
Agricultural land measuring 78 bighas and 14 big was belonging to the appellants situated in village Garhi Peeran was acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
A perusal of the application submitted by the appellants under Section 18 of the Act shows that in para 1 it was stated as under That the claimants land details of which are given in the schedule has been acquired under the aforesaid Award.
The High Court by judgment dated 10.8.1976 allowed the revision and set aside the order of the Additional District Judge dated 18.2.1975.
9 the claimants petitioners had mentioned that they were claiming companypensation for the whole of their land Rs.
60,000 each for their resettlement as their entire land in the village has been taken away under the acquisition and they have been uprooted.
They also claim 15 solatium and interest at the rate of 6 per annum on the enhanced amount of companypensation plus the solatium with effect from 4.3.1963.
20,000 per bigha.
The Additional District Judge who was seized of the matter allowed the said application by his order dated 18.2.1975.
Thus from a perusal of the application filed under Section 18 of the Act alongwith the schedule we are fully satisfied that the appellants were claiming an enhancement in the companypensation in respect of the entire land acquired and there was numberquestion of asking for a reference for a limited portion of land measuring 34 bighas and 2 big was only.
408, 411, 763, 764, 891, 893, 410, 432, 433, 504, 506, 761, 900, 901 904 had number been shown by the Land Acquisition Collector in the statement under Section 19 of the Act although he had sent the names of all the Bhoomidars of the aforesaid land.
Kasliwal, J. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of Delhi High Court dated 10.8.1976 in Civil Revision No.
It was thus prayed that in the interest of justice the Collector may be directed to file a revised statement under Section 19 of the Act giving the details of the whole of the land belonging to the claimants which had been left out on account of accidental slip or omission.
