RAJ DEVI Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of Appeals assails the Award No. 245/1986-87 in respect of Village Poothkalan passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi. The learned Additional District Judge has implemented the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Union of India v. Ram Phool (2003) 10 SCC 167 and has awarded compensation at the same rate i.e. Rs. 18,500/- per bigha. Ram Phool's case was in respect of Notification dated 11.12.1981 whereas the Notification in question before us is dated 13.2.1981. In other words for a later Notification, the compensation has already been determined by the Apex Court and would, therefore, prima facie apply to earlier Notifications also.

(2.) Mr. Khosla, learned counsel appearing for the Appellants has raised two contentions in an attempt to persuade us to charter of course different to that in Ram Phool's case. Firstly, he relies on a transaction of sale by which a parcel of land was sold by the DDA to the Union of India for construction of a Police Station, in which the compensation was substantially higher. It is his contention that since the land is situated in the same village, and since this transaction had not been disclosed in the previous proceedings which have been decided by the Supreme Court, this was sufficient reason for us to grant enhanced compensation.

(3.) So far as this contention is concerned, what is relevant is that the Notification is dated 20th August, 1976 in respect of the land which was sold by the DDA to the UOI for construction of a Police Station. There is, therefore, no identity or similarity in the two lands since the Appellants' land is agricultural in nature and the land transferred by the DDA was developed land. The price/value of the latter is bound to be much higher than the former.