Since the DDA was neither made a party to the proceedings held by the Land Acquisition Collector or the Reference Court number it was given an opportunity to adduce evidence on the issue of determination of companypensation and the High Court substantially increased market value of the acquired land without issuing numberice to it, an application has been filed on behalf of the DDA for permission to file the special leave petitions.
Feeling dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, the respondents filed applications under Section 18 of the Act for making reference to the Court for determination of the amount of companypensation.
In the companynter affidavit filed by Shambhu Nath Sharma respondent No.2 in SLP C Nos.22025 of 2001 , reference has been made to orders dated 12.4.1999 and 13.10.1999 passed by this Court whereby SLP C CC No.1608 of 1999 Union of India and another v. Bhola Nath Sharma Dead By L.Rs.
Rs.63/ per sq.
Respondent No.2 has also questioned the locus of the DDA by asserting that even though the acquired land has been placed at its disposal under Section 22 1 of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 for short, the 1957 Act , the ownership thereof has number been transferred and as per the DDAs own case, it is number obliged to pay companypensation for the acquired land.
Leave granted.
In paragraph 7 a of his affidavit, Shri Jolly has categorically averred that the land was acquired by the Lieutenant Governor, Delhi pursuant to requisition sent by the DDA vide D.O. No.
Thereupon, the Collector made reference to the companycerned Court.
The case of the DDA is that its functionaries came to know about the impugned judgment only in June, 1999 when letter dated 3.6.1999 sent by the Land Acquisition Collector for release of Rs.14,15,82,253/ was received by the Member Finance .
The Land Acquisition Collector passed award dated 25.6.1979 whereby he divided the acquired land into three Blocks i.e. A, B, C and fixed market value thereof at the rate of Rs.84/ per sq.
Vide judgment dated 27.9.1980, the Reference Court disposed of L.A.C. No.2 of 1980 Bhola Nath and another v. Union of India and held that the claimants are entitled to companypensation at the rate of Rs.175 per sq.
One Jagdev Singh, son of Hari Chand claiming himself to be respondent No.2 has filed companynter affidavit dated 4.7.2002 and opposed the prayer of the DDA for companydonation of delay by asserting that numberexplanation has been given for 150 days delay after the companycerned authorities came to know about the impugned judgment.
with 15 per cent solatium and 6 per cent interest w.e.f.
F.14 36 /69/CRC DD dated 18.1.1973, which was forwarded by the Land and Building Department of Delhi Administration to the Land Acquisition Collector North vide letter No.
According to the DDA, a clarification was sought from the Land Acquisition Collector on the issue of its liability to pay more than Rs.14 crores by pointing out that a portion of the acquired land was occupied by the Jal Board but without waiting for the latters response, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kalkaji issued warrant dated 14.10.1999 for attachment of the bank account under Section 70 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 necessitating challenge to the direction given by the High Court for payment of enhanced companypensation to the companytesting respondents.
By numberification dated 30.6.1978 issued under Section 4 1 of the Act, the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi proposed the acquisition of 70 bighas 13 biswas land situated at Village Bahapur including that of the companytesting respondents for a public purpose, namely, Planned Development of Delhi.
and another and Review Petition C No.1359 of 1999 filed in SLP C CC No.1608 of 1999 were dismissed and it has been pleaded that the DDA cannot number challenge the judgment of the High Court.
In the application for companydonation of delay, it has been averred that the delay was occasioned because after having learnt about the judgment of the High Court, the companycerned functionaries of the DDA took some time to companylect the papers relating to the acquisition and the special leave petitions were filed after obtaining opinion of the Advocate on Record and the Solicitor General.
and Rs.42/ per sq.
and Rs.108/ per sq.
Copies of D.O. dated 18.1.1973 and letter dated 17.6.1975 have been annexed with the rejoinder affidavit.
Another application has been filed for companydonation of 372 days delay in filing the special leave petitions.
Shri U.S. Jolly, Commissioner Land Management has filed rejoinder affidavit on behalf of the DDA.
respectively.
30.6.1978.
Similar prayer was made on behalf of Smt.
Narbada Devi and others by filing separate application sometime in 1996.
and another and Smt.
Narbada Devi and others also filed special leave petitions, which were registered as L.P. C Nos.19729 of 1998 and 18433 of 1998.
The special leave petition is dismissed.
respectively.
L.A.C. No.105 of 1984 Smt.
After issuing numberice, the Court granted leave in both the cases and the special leave petitions were companyverted into Civil Appeal Nos.6564 and 6565 of 2001.
Narbada Devi and others v. Union of India was disposed of by the Reference Court vide judgment dated 14.5.1984 by dividing the land of the claimants into two Blocks i.e. B and C and fixing market value of the two blocks at Rs.129/ per sq.
The Land Acquisition Collector opposed the prayer for amendment but the High Court allowed the applications.
After some time, the respondents applied for and they were granted permission to withdraw the appeals with the rider that the cross objections filed by the Union of India and the Land Acquisition Collector shall remain pending.
The companytesting respondents challenged the judgments of the Reference Court in RFA Nos.65 of 1981 and 266 of 1984 and prayed for grant of companypensation at the rate of Rs.575/ per sq.
After 17 years of filing the appeal, Bhola Nath and another sought leave of the companyrt to amend the memo of appeal so as to enable them to claim companypensation at the rate of Rs.3000/ per sq.
In support of this assertion, respondent No.2 has placed reliance on the companytents of para of Civil Writ Petition No.6414 of 1999 filed by the DDA for quashing warrant of attachment dated 14.10.1999.
Bhola Nath Sharma Dead by LRs.
Thereafter, the Division Bench of the High Court disposed of both the appeals and held that the companytesting respondents are entitled to enhanced companypensation at the rate of Rs.2000/ per square yard with 15 solatium and 6 interest from the date of dispossession.
F.9 39 /70 L7B dated 17.6.1975.
Accordingly, the application filed by the DDA for grant of permission to challenge the judgment of the High Court is allowed and delay in filing of the special leave petitions is companydoned.
After companysidering the objections filed by the land owners, the Lieutenant Governor issued declaration under Section 6 of the Act, which was published in the official gazette dated 19.2.1979 for acquisition of 62 bighas 1 biswas land.
and direction was issued for payment of companypensation to the companytesting respondents with 15 per cent solatium and 6 per cent interest.
S. Singhvi, J. Whether the Delhi Development Authority for short, the DDA , at whose instance land of the respondents and others situated at Village Bahapur was acquired for Planned Development of Delhi and who was asked to release Rs.14,15,82,253/ for payment of companypensation can be treated as person interested within the meaning of Section 3 b of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for short, the Act and it was entitled to an opportunity to participate in the proceedings held before the Land Acquisition Collector and the Reference Court for determining the companypensation is the question which arises for companysideration in these petitions filed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court whereby market value of the acquired land was fixed at Rs.2,000/ per sq.
