MAHANT ATMA RAM Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE land of the appellant late Mahant Atma Ram was acquired by the Government of NCT of Delhi, by way of notification dated 12.10.1983 issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, followed by a declaration dated 12.1.1984 made under Section 6 of the said Act. The award came to be passed by the Land Acquisition Collector on 27.8.1984 and the compensation awarded to the appellant was a laughable amount of Rs.1 per square yard, as against the claim of Rs.50,000/- per square yard. The land subject matter of the acquisition was already in possession of the respondent at the time notification under Section 4(1) of the said Act was issued, the same having been possessed during emergency. On being forcibly dispossessed from his land, the appellant filed a civil suit being CS(OS) No.1190/1978 in this Court seeking recovery of possession along with damages etc from the respondents. The aforesaid suit resulted in a compromise whereby respondent agreed to acquire the aforesaid land under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act and pay compensation in accordance with law to the appellant. As a part of the settlement, DDA also agreed to lease out a plot measuring 225 square yards to the appellant at a pre-determined rate of Rs.418 per meter. Pursuant to the said settlement, the appellant agreed not to object to the notification being issued under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act for formal acquisition of his land in accordance with law.

(2.) SINCE the appellant was not satisfied with nominal compensation awarded to him by the Land Acquisition Collector, a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was made to the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi. The learned Additional District Judge vide his order dated 8.12.1998 enhanced the compensation to Rs.75 per square yard. Being still dissatisfied with the compensation awarded to him, the appellant filed this appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation to Rs.50,000/- per square yard.

(3.) AN appeal came to be preferred by the respondent-Union of India against the aforesaid order passed by the Division Bench of this Court. Vide order dated 25.9.2012, the Supreme Court, noticing that in the appeal filed before this Court, Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs was the sole respondent and the said Ministry had nothing to do with the subject matter of the appeal but also noticing that vide subsequent order dated 30.3.2000, the Land Acquisition Collector, South District was also impleaded in the appeal as respondent no.2 though there was nothing to indicate service of notice of the appeal on the said LAC, the appeal filed by the respondent was allowed and it was directed that the legal representatives of the appellant who had since died shall carry out necessary amendments in the cause title by describing the parties properly and would also implead DDA as party respondent. It was also directed that since DDA and LAC were already represented before the Apex Court, no further notice was required to be given to them. In compliance of the aforesaid order of the Supreme Court, an amended memo of parties was filed by the appellant on 30.11.2012 impleading the LAC, South District as respondent no.2 and DDA as respondent no.3 in the appeal.