COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION Vs. PUNE RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dated 1.12.2017, passed by learned Additional District Judge, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh in Execution Petition No. 13 of 2017 titled Pune Ram Versus LAC and others, whereby the learned Executing Court has dismissed the objections having been filed by the petitioner/Judgment Debtor (hereinafter referred to as 'Judgment Debtor'), Judgment Debtor has approached this Court by way of instant Revision Petition under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying therein for setting aside the impugned order dated 1.12.2017.

(2.) Facts as emerge from the record are that the respondents-Award Holders (hereinafter referred to as 'Award Holders') filed an Execution Petition in the learned Court below, seeking therein directions to the Judgment Debtor to pay them enhanced compensation with respect to land measuring 1-01-00 Bigha, comprised in Khasra Nos. 59 min and 90 situated in Phati Dhaugi Kothi Bunga District Kullu, H.P.

(3.) Judgment debtor, while refuting the claim set up in the Execution Petition, filed objections averring therein that the petition having been filed by the Award Holders, seeking therein enhancement of compensation qua the estate of Pune Ram son of Lajje Ram to the extent of 1/6th share is not maintainable. Judgment Debtor claimed before the learned Executing Court that Tek Ram was missing for the last 40 years and he was not alive at the time of passing of Award by the Land Acquisition Collector, Kullu. Further claimed that neither Tek Ram filed any reference petition under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter, referred to as 'Act') nor filed an application under Sec. 28A of the Act and as such, after passing of the Award, present application for enhancement of amount of compensation is not maintainable. Judgment Debtor also claimed that Lajje Ram was father of Tek Ram, Narayan Singh and Tedhi Singh, and Narayan Singh and his sister Lachhmu Devi are alive and they are entitled to inherit the estate of Tek Ram being 2nd class legal heirs and the mutation in favour of the present Award Holders has been wrongly attested and accepted by the revenue agency. Judgment Debtor further averred in its objections/reply that the Land Acquisition Collector paid amount to one Leela Chand son of Heera Chand, who was alleged to be the nephew of said Tek Ram, on the basis of Special Power of Attorney, but later on it was found that he was not entitled for any compensation on the basis of Special Power of Attorney.