SHIMLA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. KRISHNA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise out of land acquisition references in respect of the acquisition of 102 -11 bighas of land situated in three villages, namely Patti Rihana I and II and Kasumpti Junga, of Tehsil and District Shimla. The acquisition was to develop the land as house sites in accordance with the interim development plan of the Shimla Development Authority constituted Under Sec. 40 of the Himachal Pradesh Town and Country Planning Act, 1977. The land acquired is partly in Station Ward Chhota Shimla and the remaining extent is contiguous land beyond the municipal limits of the city of Shimla.

(2.) The notification Under Sec. 4 of the land Acquisition Act was published in January 1980. The Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 40,000/ - per bight. On reference by the respective claimants the court below has enhanced the compensation toupees one lakh per bigha. It is against this that the Shimla Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as the S.D.A.) has come up in appeal. Some of the claimants have filed memorandum of cross objections for further enhancement of compensation. After the claimants in the respective references had adduced part of their evidence the cases were consolidated on 13 -3 -1985 and common evidence was adduced in reference No. 21 -S/4 of 1984 against which the S.D.A. has filed R.F.A. No. 6 of 1988. For the reason that part of the evidence had been adduced by different claimants before the cases were consolidated, there is duplication of evidence in these references. There is also common evidence adduced after the consolidation.

(3.) The S.D.A. after the cases were consolidated filed petitions on 7 -11 -1985 before the reference court for its impalement as a party to the references. The court below by order dated 23 -11 -1985 dismissed these applications however, allowing the S.D.A. to participate in the trial and lead evidence on the question of compensation. This order was challenged in revision by the S.D.A. before this Court in C.R. No. 210 of 1985 and connected cases. This Court on 24 -4 -1986 by consent of parties allowed the S.D.A. to be impleaded as party to the references allowing it to file statement in reply and also to adduce evidence. The order of this Court in revision does not, however, permit the S.D.A. to recall the witnesses already examined for the purpose of their cross -examination. The S.D.A. thereafter filed its statement in reply on 17 -5 -1986 and on the basis of that reply the following additional issues were framed: