NIHAL SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were co-sharers in the land measuring 160 Bighas 17 Biswas situated in the revenue estate of Bhatinda which alongwith other land, in all 1230.80 acres of land was acquired for defence purposes by the Union of India, respondent No. 1, vide notification dated 20.1.1975 issued under section 8 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The market value of the land was assessed by the Special Land Acquisition Collector, respondent No. 2 vide his award dated 6.3.1975. At the time of acquisition of land, the petitioners No. 1 and 5 were owners of land measuring 16 Bighas 4 Biswas while petitioner No. 6 owned 10 Bighas 4 Biswas of land. Sarvshri Angrez Singh and Pritam Singh sons of Kirpal Singh were their co-sharers in the joint Khata.

(2.) Being not satisfied with the award, the petitioners submitted applications dated 27.8.1975, Annexures P.1 and P.2 for making reference to the Arbitrator for determination of compensation under section 8(1)(b) of the Act. Their co- sharers above-named, similarly made applications for reference to the Arbitrator. Through the present Writ Petition, the petitioners have brought to the Court their grievance that while in the case of their co-sharers, a reference was made to the Arbitrator by the respondents on 21.9.84, 22.10.84 and 9.11.84 and ultimately, in their case, the Additional District Judge, Bhatinda has made his award dated 19.11.1985, Annexure P.3 enhancing the amount of compensation with further direction to pay them solatium and interest in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by Act No. 68 of 1984, in the case of the petitioners no reference has been made by the respondents to the Arbitrator. They have, thus, prayed inter alia for issuance of a direction to the respondents to submit reference of the dispute with regard to compensation payable to them as raised through their applications Annexures P.1 and P.2 to the learned District Judge, Bhatinda.

(3.) The petition has been opposed by the respondents and written statement on their behalf has been filed by the Defence Estate Officer, Patiala Circle, Patiala, who has denied the receipt of the applications Annexures P.1 and P.2 from the petitioners, but has further contended that so as to verify the correctness of their assertions that they filed such applications for arbitration, they should be directed to produce the office copies of these applications. It was admitted that reference to the Arbitrator was made on the applications of the co-sharers of the petitioners namely Sarvshri Angrez Singh, Pritam Singh and others. It has been further contended that the petitioners had executed an agreement in form 'K' and thus, disentitled themselves from seeking reference of the dispute to the Arbitrator. Any such form 'K' having been executed by Angrez Singh, Pritam Singh and others was not available on the relevant record and since these co-sharers had made their applications for reference in time, in the absence of any agreement in form 'K' having been executed by them, the matter was referred for arbitration.