HUKUM CHAND Vs. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the dispute arise out of the same award made by the Collector, Land Acquisition. We are disposing of the petitions by a common order.

(2.) CW 4801/94 is by three claimants, namely. Smt. Kanta Devi Mittal. Smt. Krishna w/o Shri Shish Pal and Shish Pal (hereinafter referred to as the claimants). Direction has been sought for in this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, against the respondents to tender payment of the amount of compensation in respect of 45 bighas 17 biswas of land situated within the revenue estate of Tughlakabad acquired under award No.4 of 1994-95. Another direction has also been sought for assessment and grant of additional compensation provided under Section 23 (1A) of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) at the rate of 12% is by Hukam Chand and two others, the sons of late Pt. Leela Ram. who have questioned the legality and validity of an order passed on 16th March. 1995 by the Collector. Land Acquisition by which the Collector declined to make reference to the court for apportionment of the amount of compensation and directed it to be paid to the aforementioned three claimants

(3.) Briefly the facts as are alleged in CW 1032/95 are that late Pt. Leela Ram in the month of October. 1962 purchased 59 bighas 5 biswas of land in Tughlakabad for the purpose of developing a colony, since he was engaged in the trade of making colonies. It is claimed that though he was the purchaser but transactions were made in the name of different persons, namely. Chander Singh. Dal Singh. Ram Swaroop etc. On April 13. 1972. Pt. Leela Ram expired and was succeeded by the petitioners, his sons. In 1978 a suit was filed against Chander Singh and others claiming that property in fact belongs to the heirs of Pt Leela Ram since Pt Leela Ram had paid the entire amount of consideration In the meanwhile on 5.11 1980 a notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued The land was sought to be acquired for public purpose. Declaration under Section 6 was made on June 6. 1985. Both the notifications under Sections 4 & 6 of the Act were ultimately quashed by this court on November 18. 1988 in a writ petition - Balak Ram Gupta v. Union of India, 37 (1989) DLT 150. In the meanwhile Ram Swamp, in his written statement filed in the civil suit admitted the petitioners claim that in fact the petitioners were the owners of the property. D Singh and legal representatives of Ram Swamp in the meanwhile sold the land to the claimants (the petitioners in CW 4801/94). which had been purchased by Leela Ram On June 1. 1992 a fresh notification under Sections 4 & 17( 1) of the Act was issued notifying the intention' of the Government to acquire the property for the planned development of Delhi, namely, wild life sanctuary. In view of invoking of provisions of Section 17( 1) of the Act formality of complying with the requirement of Sections 5-A stood waived of. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made on July 29, 1992. In response to notices issued under Sections 9 & 10(1) of the Act, the petitioners herein, namely, three sons of Pt. Leela Ram preferred their claim Award under Section 11 of the Act was made by the Collector. Land Acquisition on May 17. 1994 (Award No. 4 of 1994-95). The award stipulated that the payment of compensation will be made to all the Interested persons as per the latest revenue record and as regards cases, where there is dispute, the same shall be referred to the court of learned Additional District Judge for determination of title of apportionment under Sections 30 and 31 of the Act.