Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2023 DAILYLAW 4808 (PNJ)

BEDO DEVI v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

RFA/1894/2023 · 2026-02-26

Harkesh Manuja

body2023

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

251 IN TH Bebo Devi State of Har CORAM: Present: HARKESH CM No. 54 3015 days learned co opposes th dismissal o gone throu pertaining been held e dated 25.0 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR RFA Date Devi Versus Haryana and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR None for the appellant. Mr. Abhinash Jain, Deputy Adv for the respondent(s). **** KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) 5473-CI-2023 This is an application for days in filing the appeal. Upon notice, no reply ha ed counsel representing the re ses the prayer made in the ap issal of the application. I have heard learned coun through the contents of the applica Concededly, the other simil ining to the same acquisition pr held entitled for the amount of com 25.03.2022 passed by this Cou UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 1894 of 2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.02.2026 ...Appellant ...Respondents HARKESH MANUJA Advocate General, Haryana for condonation of delay of ly has been filed, however, e respondent(s) vehemently he application and prays for counsel for the parties and pplication. r similarly situated landowners proceedings have already of compensation vide judgment s Court in RFA No. 1485 of DINESH KUMAR 2026.03.05 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document          -2-     2014, titled “Manoj Kumar and others Versus State of Haryana and another”. Based thereupon and applying the principle of parity, besides grant of just and fair compensation, the landowner(s)/applicant(s) being similarly situated is/are held entitled for grant of similar amount of compensation, however, without any payment of interest for the period of delay in filing the present appeal. In this regard, reliance can be placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of “Ningappa Thotappa Angadi (Dead) through LRs Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Another” reported as “2020 (19) SCC 599” and the latest exposition of law in Mohar Singh (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh Collector & Ors. reported as “2023 INSC 1019” whereby, delay of 12 years and 353 days was condoned to accord parity between similarly placed landowners albeit no interest was awarded for delayed period. The relevant portion thereof is extracted hereunder:- “12. Having heard learned Senior Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, we are satisfied that the appellants are entitled to seek parity with their co-villagers in the grant of compensation for their acquired land. This Court has consistently held in a catena of decisions that the inordinate delay in filing appeal in compensatory matters, per se, may not be fatal as the rights and equities between the parties can be well balanced by denying the statutory benefits, such as interest for the delayed period. We are thus of the considered opinion that the delay in filing the first appeal(s) could be DINESH KUMAR 2026.03.05 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document          -3-     condoned subject to the condition that the appellants would not be entitled to enure undue benefit for the delayed period. We grant such indulgence in the appellant's favour also for the reason that a batch of first appeals at the instance of other land owners was still pending consideration before the High Court. All that the High Court ought to have emphatically denied to the late-comers was the benefit of interest including on the solatium, under Section 34 of the Act for the period from the date of passing of the award by the Reference Court till the filing of the first appeals.”   In view of the discussion made hereinabove as well as contents of the application, the same is allowed and delay in filing the appeal, as mentioned above, is hereby condoned. However, the applicant(s) shall not be entitled for interest for the period of delay in filing the appeal. MAIN CASE At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent(s)- State of Haryana submits that the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision 25.03.2022 passed by this Court in RFA No. 1485 of 2014, titled “Manoj Kumar and others Versus State of Haryana and another”, whereby the market value of the acquired land was assessed at the rate of Rs. 45 lakhs per acre. [2] No one appears on behalf of the appellant- landowner. [3] After going through the judgment passed in Manoj Kumar’s case (supra) as well as the facts of the present case, DINESH KUMAR 2026.03.05 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document          -4-     this Court agrees with the assertion of the learned counsel for the respondent(s). [4] Consequently, the present appeal is disposed off in the same terms as Manoj Kumar’s case (supra). [5] It is further added that the appellant(s) shall not be entitled to interest for the period of delay of 3015 days in filing the appeal. [6] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off.  February 26, 2026 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’ JUDGE            DINESH KUMAR 2026.03.05 18:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document