UNION OF INDIA Vs. MOHINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two main questions that arise for consideration in these two appeals are the constitutional validity of the two provisos to clause (e) of sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Resettlement of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", and the construction of the aforesaid provisos. These appeals had come up for hearing before a Division Bench of this Court (S. K. Kapur and M. R. A. Ansari, JJ.). Reliance was placed upon a decision of another Division Bench of this Court in re. Mongol Sen v. Union of India whereby the said provisos had been struck down. The Division Bench hearing these appeals felt that the judgement in Mangal Sen's case needed reconsideration and the construction of the aforesaid provisos was also an important question. These appeals were therefore, referred to a larger Bench.

(2.) R.F.A. No. 51-D of 1961 is the appeal filed by the Union of India and connected with it is F.A.O. No. 56-D of 1961 filed by Shrimati Mohinder Kaur.

(3.) The land in dispute is a plot measuring 1629. 2 sq. yards situate in Block No. 56 of Western Extension Area, Karol Bash Delhi. It had been demised on a 99 years lease by the Delhi Improvement Trust by a lease dated August 11, 1942, in consideration for an amount of Rs.7331.00/6.00 in favour of one H.A. Reh- man. Rehman sold his leasehold interest to the Delhi Land and Finance Limited on July 23, 1947, inconsideration for a sum of Rs. 40,730 In its turn, the Delhi Land and Finance Limited assigned the leasehold interest in favour of Harbans Singh, son of Smt. Mohinder Kaur the respondent in the regular first appeal, in consideration for an amount of Rs. 43,988.00 by a deed dated March 22, 1949. In purported exercise of the powers under section 3 of the Act, the Provincial Government issued a notification on November 2, 1953, for acquisition of the land and in pursuance of this notification possession of the land was taken. For determining the amount of compensation payable for the acquisition, the matter was referred to various arbitrators and ultimately it was decided by Mr. K. S. Sidhu, who gave his award on December 31, 1960. He determined the compensation under the second proviso to clause (e) of sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Act and fixed the amount of compensation at Rs. 40,730.00 which was the consideration received by H.A. Rehman from the Delhi Land and Finance Limited. The contention of the Union of India was that compensation should have been determined under the first provisio. The contention on behalf of Shrimati Mohinder Kaur was that it should be determined according to clause first of sub-section (1) of section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, that is, according to the market value of the land on the date of publication of the aforesaid notice under section 3 in 1953. That is how the Union of India and Shrimati Mohinder Kaur have both filed appeals against the award.