Court No. - 59
Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 491 of 2015 Appellant :- Waleen Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Satyendra Kumar Singh,Virendra Kumar Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- Anuj Pratap Singh,Ashish Agrawal
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Heard Sri Virendra Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the claimants- appellants, learned standing counsel for the State-respondent and Sri Ashish Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 - U.P.S.I.D.C.
This first appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree dated 31.10.2009 in L.A.R.No. 91 of 1994 (Waleen Vs. State of U.P. and another) passed by the Addl. District Judge, Court No.6, Ghaziabad. By the aforesaid impugned common judgment 25 references were decided. The references were rejected.
Briefly stated facts of the present case are that by Notification No.10258, dated 6.4.1989, under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1892 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") published in the gazette on 6.4.1989 and in daily newspapers on 24.4.1989/29.4.1989, land measuring 79.875 acres of Village Sadabad Doogarwali, Pargana - Lony, Tahsil and District - Ghaziabad, was acquired. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was published in the gazette on 23.11.1989 and in Daily News Papers on 25.2.1990/27.2.1990. The possession was taken on 30.5.1991. The Special Land Acquisition Officer made the award on 26.2.1992 @ Rs.32 per sq. yd. alongwith other statutory benefits. Aggrieved with the award, large number of tenure holders filed reference applications which were registered as Land Acquisition References. Twenty Five such Land Acquisition References were decided by the impugned common judgment dated 31.10.2009. The present appeal arises from Land Acquisition Reference No.91 of 1994. First Appeal No.65 of 2016 was filed by Sri Yaseen and others against the judgment passed in their references being L.A.R. No.92 of 1994, which was also decided by the impugned common judgment. The aforesaid First Appeal No.65 of 2016 was partly allowed by this Court by judgment and order dated 28.5.2018 in terms of the judgment in L.A.R. No.116 of 1994 which also arose from the same acquisition. In L.A.R. No.116 of 1994, the compensation was determined @ Rs.72 per sq. yard by a common judgment dated 4.1.2003 in 33 Land Acquisition References, passed by the IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad.
On 28.11.2018, the present appeal was heard and following order was passed:
"Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the controversy involved in the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision of this Court dated 28.5.2018, in First Appeal No.65 of 2016 whereby the compensation determined in L.A.R. No.116 of 1994 has been directed to be paid to the appellant also.
Sri Ashish Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 prays for and is granted a day's time to verify as to whether the judgment in L.A.R. No.116 of 1994 or the judgment in L.A.R. No.393 of 1997 or the judgment dated 28.5.2018 in First Appeal No.65 of 2016 has been interfered with by any Higher Court.
As prayed, put up on 30.11.2018."
Today, Sri Ashish Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 states that the judgment in First Appeal No.65 of 2016 has attained finality inasmuch as no S.L.P. was filed against the said order. It is relevant to note that the present first appeal and the First Appeal No.65 of 2016 both arose from the impugned common judgment. Under the circumstances, this Court has no option but to follow the judgment passed in First Appeal No.65 of 2016.
For the reasons aforestated, this appeal is partly allowed in terms of the common judgment dated 4.1.2003 in Leading L.A.R. No.116 of 1994. The impugned judgment and decree in L.A.R. No.91 of 1994 stands modified accordingly. The appellant shall be entitled to all the benefits as has been granted under the aforesaid judgment passed in L.A.R. No.116 of 1994.
Order Date :- 30.11.2018/vkg