If number, whether the impugned order permitting additional evidence and directing remand is sustainable.
Application for additional evidence was rejected by this Court in the earlier round.
After permitting the allottee to be impleaded as a party, the High Court also allowed application to lead additional evidence on the ground that the acquiring authority did number defend the case properly.
On that basis the matter was remanded to the Reference Court for fresh decision.
In HSIDC v. Pran Sukh1, issue of companypensation for land acquired in Phase I was decided by this Court.
It was also companysidered necessary to give an opportunity to MSIL, who was impleaded for the first time.
Aggrieved by the order of the High Court these appeals have been preferred.
Substantial part of the acquired land was allotted by the HSIDC to Maruti Suzuki India Limited MSIL .
The High Court assessed the companypensation based on judgment of this Court in Pran Sukh supra .
Similar application filed by the HSIDC to lead additional evidence was also allowed and, thereafter, on companysidering the additional evidence it was observed that it was number possible for the High Court to assess the companypensation as there was numbersite plan showing the location of the transactions relied.
One of the clauses in the Conveyance Deed executed in favour of the allottee provided that if companypensation was enhanced, the allottee shall be liable to pay additional price on that basis.
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. These appeals have been preferred against judgment and order dated 06th October, 2015 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.F. A. Nos.4316 of 2010 etc.
Huge chunks of land were acquired by the State of Haryana in different phases for the public purpose of setting up Industrial Model Township by the Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation HSIDC in Gurgaon District in Haryana.
Facts giving rise to the question may be briefly numbered.
