PREMWATI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Government acquired certain lands in village Chandrawali, Delhi, now known as Makki Sarai, Railway Road, Shahdara, Delhi for the construction of Metro Rail by the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation(DMRC). Land Acquisition Collector (LAC) rendered his Award No.1/1990- 2000/Chandrawali/Shahdara. Thereafter, he remitted a sum of Rs. 18,48,55,526/- to the Addl. District Judge, Delhi along with reference under Sections 30 & 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1898(for short, the Act.) for apportionment of the said amount among the disputed parties. The claimants were very large in number and we are not concerned with all of them. Vide the impugned judgments dated 28.1.2008 and 30.1.2008, the learned ADJ has decided the cases of two such claimants, who were IP No. 360 and362 respectively. By reason of those judgments, claims of both these interested persons, who are husband and wife, have been rejected holding that they are not entitled to any compensation. Aggrieved by these judgments, which deal with identical issues, under almost identical circumstances, these two appeals are preferred by them.

(2.) THE appellants filed their claim before the LAC stating that they were the owners and in possession of built up property, including the land underneath and superstructure of property No. 1022-B (Old No. 12),Makki Sarai, Railway Road, Shahdara, Delhi. According to them, late Smt. Dhan Kaur, mother of the appellant Jage Ram, had purchased the property measuring 160 sq. yds. with two rooms situated in khasra No. 447 of Village Chandrawali, whose recorded owner was one Mohd. Abdul Samad, s/o. Mohd. Abdul Gani. The property was sold by Mohd. Abdul Samad, purportedly through his attorney Shri Jagdish Singh, on 10.5.1962 vide Sale Agreement and Power of Attorney. Physical possession of the said property was given to Smt. Dhan Kaur. Smt. Dhan Kaur executed Will in favour of the appellant on 10.1.1974, which was registered with the Sub- Registrar, Delhi. She died on 10.2.1974 and in this manner the appellant became owner of this property. They got the said property mutated in their name in the records of the House Tax Department, MCD in the year 1975.

(3.) THE dispute about the purported ownership of the appellant had arisen under the following circumstances: Mohd. Abdul Samad, who was the original owner of the land, had, on the partition of the country, migrated to Pakistan. The question was as to whether the property is vested with the Custodian of Evacuee Property Department under the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950or Mohd. Abdul Samad had executed a valid General Power of Attorney in favour of Shri Jagdish Singh, who had, on the strength of the said Power of Attorney, sold the property in question to Smt. Dhan Kaur.