CHARANJIT KAUR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants as well as for the Union of India and State of Punjab.

(3.) The main grievance projected for the appellants is that when the appeals filed by the Union of India against the very judgment in respect of which these appeals before the High Court were also filed are pending, the appeals of the claimants in the High Court alone could not have been segregated and separately disposed of leading to grave injustice resulting in perfunctory determination of compensation and claims relating thereto, pertaining to the very subject matter in issue, in all such appeals . We have been taken through the judgment of the High Court. Ms. Indra Sawhney, learned counsel appearing for the Union of India contends that the final hearing and disposal of these matters may be kept in abeyance by granting leave and the orders on the appeals filed by the respondents herein in the High Court may be awaited so that the appeals against such decision can be considered together by this Court. In other respect it is contended that the compensation awarded and affirmed by the High Court is reasonable and that the claim for further enhancement has rightly not met with the acceptance of the Division Bench of the High Court. It is also contended that what is now the subject matter of the appeals filed by the Union of India and pending before the High Court is only as to the percentage of deduction to be made for purposes of development i.e. whether it is to be fixed at 20% on the average price or more or at 53% as claimed by the Union of India, and consequently there is no justification for interference with the judgment of the High Court under challenge, at this stage.