Court No. - 5
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 140 of 2018 Appellant :- Pankaj Ray Kotra Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Collector Ghaziabad Counsel for Appellant :- M.D.Singh Shekhar,Shiv Sagar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- S.C.,Amit Manohar
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Mahboob Ali,J.
This is an appeal filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Reference Court in its order dated 24.3.1993.
It is a common ground that present dispute also arose pursuant to notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which has been challenged in First Appeal No. 522 of 2009, and the land in the present appeal is in the same village i.e. Makanpur, Tehsil Dadri, District Ghaziabad. The dispute with regard to the order of reference court was considered in First Appeal No. 522 of 2009 (Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P. & Another) with a large number of companion appeals. The said appeal was allowed by this Court on 21.4.2016. The operative portion of the judgment reads as under:
"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 appeal filed by the NOIDA are dismissed and consigned to record."
The judgment in First Appeal No. 522 of 2009 (Pradeep Kumar v. State of U.P.) came to be challenged in Civil Appeal Nos. 10429-10430 of 2017 (Narendra & Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.). The said appeal was allowed by the Supreme Court and the order of the High Court was set aside. The operative portion of the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 11.9.2017 is extracted herein below:
"17) In fine, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and these appeals are allowed holding that appellants are also entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs.297/- per square yards. The difference in compensation along with other statutory benefits under the Act shall be calculated and paid to the appellants within a period of three months from today. It is also directed that the appellants shall make good in deficiency of court fee before the High Court. Appellants shall also be entitled to costs of these appeals."
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appeal may be decided in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 11.9.2017.
Sri Amit Manohar, learned Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of respondents does not dispute the said statement of learned counsel for the appellant at the Bar.
We have perused the reference order, judgment of First Appeal No. 522 of 2009 and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 10429-10430 of 2017.
This appeal stands allowed in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court extracted herein above.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 25.7.2018 Digamber