Shiv Charan (Died) through L.Rs. and Others vs The State of Haryana and Another

G.C. Garg, J.—This order will dispose of civil misc. applications 3202-CI of 1997 to 3206-CI of 1997.

Land owned by the applicants or their predecessor alongwith the land of others situated in, the revenue estate of Faridabad was acquired for the development of Sector 14 in the Faridabad controlled area by issuing notifications Under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. Notification u/s 4 of the Act is dated 29.6.1996. The land owners being dissatisfied with the Award of. the land Acquisition Collector sought references Under Sections 18 of the Act. The learned District Judge, Gurgaon by order dated 2. 5.1973 dismissed the reference applications, in other words be maintained the compensation as awarded by the learned Land Acquisition Collector. The applicants and others feeling dissatisfied with the award of the learned District Judge filed Regular First appeals in this Court.

A Division Bench of this court by order dated 8.5.1979 allowed by appeals relating to the land covered by notification u/s 4 of the Act and fixed the market value of the land covered by Sector 14 at the rate of Rs. 10 per Sq.Yd. The claimants were further held entitled to enhanced compensation only to the extent to which they had already paid the court fee on appeals in this court. The claimants were also held entitled to solatium at the rate of 15 per cent and interest at the rate of 6 per cent on the enhanced amount from the date of taking possession till the payment.

The appeal filed by the applicants was also taken up on 8.5.1979 and was disposed of in the same terms as in R.F.A. 664 of 1973.

It may be noticed that the applicants had paid a court fee of Rs. 8834.40 P., which was not sufficient to meet the enhanced amount of compensation as directed by the Division Bench. The applicants consequently moved an application u/s 144 read with Section 151 of the CPC with a prayer that they be permitted to amend the appeal to claim a compensation of Rs. 9,27,070/- instead of Rs. 6.65,000/- and to pay the requisite deficit court fee on the additional amount. This application was considered by the Division Bench of this court and was dismissed by order dated 28.1.1991.

Applicants feeling aggrieved by the order of the Division Bench refusing to ''make up the deficiency in Court fee filed Special-Leave Petition, which was granted and the Supreme Court ultimately permitted the applicants to pay the deficit court fee and to claim the compensation at the rate of Rs. 10 per sq.Yd. as determined by the High Court by passing the following order on 11.1.1995 :-

"Leave granted in SLP Nos. 7983, 8362/89. Following the order in C.A. Nos. 3451/83 and batch dated April 13, 1993, the appellants are not entitled for further enhancement of the compensation. However, the appellants are permitted to pay the deficit court fee to claim the compensation of Rs. 10/- per square yard as determined by the High Court only to this extent, the appeals are allowed. No costs."

It is thereafter that the applicants have moved CM. No. 3205-CI of 1997 to pay the deficit court fee for claiming the compensation at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq.yd.

In response to the notice of the applications respondent-State has put in appearance.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties CM. 3202-CI of 1997 seeking exemption from filing the certified copy of the death certificate, CM. 3203 of 1997 seeking to strike of the name of Satish Kumar from array of the appellants. CM. 3204-CI of 1997 seeking to strike of the name of deceased Kala Devi from the array of the appellants and CM. 3205-CI of 1997 seeking to make the deficiency in court fee by amending the memorandum of appeal are allowed. C.M. No. 3203-CI of 1997 again seeking to amend the memorandum of appeal for making up the deficiency in court fee is also allowed on the short ground that applicants have already been allowed to make up the deficiency in court fee by the apex court to claim compensation subject to a maximum of Rs. 10 per Sq.Yd. It is consequently held that the applicants shall be entitled to compensation subject to a maximum of Rs. 10 per Sq. yd. in respect of their acquired land, but subject to the extent of court fee paid. They are, however, held not entitled to the costs of the appeal or the applications.

The learned State Counsel, however, submitted that the appeals were disposed of by this court in the year 1979 and in this view of the matter the claimants-applicants cannot be held entitled to interest at the rate of 6 per cent on the compensation, which the applicants will be now entitled to on account of the making up the deficiency in court fee from the date of the order of the Division Bench Le. 8.5.1979 atleast till today, either in equity or otherwise as they themselves were responsible for such a situation on account of not affixing the proper court fee-on the memorandum of appeal while filing the same. We have considered this, aspect of the matter and are of the opinion that the contention Has substance. The State Government cannot be burdened with the interest for the period 8.5.1979 till today only on the ground that the claimants have been permitted to make up the deficiency in court fee and claim a higher compensation that the one they were entitled to in terms of the memorandum of appeal initially filed by them. The claimants in our view by making up the deficiency in court fee shall be entitled to the enhanced rate of market value in terms of the Division Bench order of this court passed on 8.5.1979 and also interest at the rate of 6 per cent from the date of possession till 8.5.1979 and from today till the date of payment. In other words the claimants will be entitled to all the relief granted by the Division Bench while allowing the connected appeals, but shall not be entitled to interest for the period 8.5.1979 till the date of this order. The authorities shall now re-determine the amount of compensation and disburse it to the applicants in accordance with law at a very early date.