Court No. - 5
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 582 of 1995 Appellant :- New Okhla Industrial Development Authority Respondent :- Raj Kumar And Others Counsel for Appellant :- U.S.Awasthi,Ajai Kumar Mishra,Amit Manohar,Ashwani Kr. Misra Counsel for Respondent :- N.Lal,Alok Kr. Srivastava,Shiv Sagar Singh
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
Learned counsel for the respondent Sri S.S. Singh has made a statement at the Bar that the deficiency of the Court fee has already been made good. He states that in case any further deficiency is pointed out the tenure holder are ready to make it good.
Order on Civil Misc. Substitution Application No. 397633 of 2017 Substitution application has been moved on behalf of legal heirs of defendant no. 2/1, who is said to have died on 12.10.2017.
Contents of Substitution application are uncontroverted. Accordingly, substitution application is allowed.
Order on Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 301480 of 2017 and Civil Misc. Substitution Application No. 301481 of 2017 This Substitution application along with delay condonation application has been moved on behalf of the legal heirs of the defendant no. 1 and 2 who are stated to have died on 30.09.2018 and 19.07.1995 respectively.
Cause shown is sufficient.
Accordingly, both the applications are allowed. Delay is condoned.
Learned counsel for cross objectionist is allowed to carry out the necessary amendment in the memo of the parties during the course of the day.
Cross objection has been brought on record.
We have heard Sri Amit Manohar, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri S.S. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent.
Present First Appeal No. 582 of 1995, has been preferred aggrieved by the order of the VIII Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad dated 24.03.1993, whereby the reference court has granted compensation of Rs. 108/- per yard.
A bunch of appeals filed by tenure holders as well as respondent authorities were preferred. These appeals were decided by this Court on 21.04.2016, whereby appeals filed by tenure holders were allowed but the appeals filed by Noida were dismissed. This Court has granted compensation to the tenure holders @ Rs. 297 per square yard.
It is stated at the Bar that against the judgement dated 21.04.2016, passed in bunch of appeals (leading First Appeal No. 522 of 2003) no SLP has been filed as such the said order has attained the finality.
In view of the said fact that cross objection has been filed in respect of the same reference order in which this court vide order dated 21.04.2016 has held that tenure holders are entitled for compensation at the rate of Rs. 297/- per square yard and accordingly both the parties have stated that this cross objection may also be decide to the same terms.
Accordingly, the cross objection is allowed, in terms of the operative order passed in the case of Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P., which is extracted below :-
"42. The appeals of the tenure holders are allowed. The orders of the Reference Court dated 24.3.1993 and dated 30.4.1993 are set aside. It is held that tenure holders shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 297/- per square yard.
43. At this stage, counsel for the NOIDA pointed out that there may be deficiency in the court fees if the rate of Rs. 297/- per square yard is applied and compensation is directed to be granted to the tenure holders by this Court.
44. We, therefore, provide that any deficiency of court fees detected shall be recovered in accordance with law while preparing final decree by the court.
45. The appeals filed by the NOIDA are dismissed and consigned to record."
In view of the above, cross objection stand allowed. Order Date :- 13.9.2018 Ujjawal