176 IN TH Bharat Sing The State o CORAM: Present: HARKESH CM Nos. 29 counsel for 2280 days i respondent application through the pertaining t held entitled IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR RFA Date t Singh and others Versus tate of Haryana and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HAR Mr. Bikram Chaudhary, Advoca for the appellants. Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Addit for the respondent(s). **** KESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) 2941-CI & 2942-CI of 2024 Instant two applications have b el for applicants-appellants re:condon days in re-filing and filing the appeal Notice of the applications was No reply has been filed; howev ndents vehemently opposes the ation(s). I have heard learned counse h the contents of the application(s). Concededly, the other simi ning to the same acquisition procee ntitled for the enhanced amount of c UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH RFA No. 1185 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.02.2026 ...Appellants ...Respondents HARKESH MANUJA dvocate Additional Advocate General, Hayan have been moved by the learned ondonation of delay of 1102 and peal respectively. was issued on 20.12.2024. however, learned counsel for the the prayer made in the ounsel for the parties and gone . similarly situated landowners proceedings have already been nt of compensation pertaining to ayana DINESH KUMAR 2026.02.12 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
       -2-     the acquired land falling in the same revenue estate in view of judgment/order dated 31.05.2019 passed by this Court in a bunch of appeals, lead case of which was RFA No. 7108 of 2012, titled “Rampal and others (II) Versus Land Acquisition Collector and another”. Based thereupon and applying the principle of parity, besides grant of just and fair compensation, the landowners/applicants being similarly situated are held entitled for grant of similar amount of compensation, however, without any payment of interest for the period of delay in filing / re-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 DINESH KUMAR 2026.02.12 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
       -3-     delayed period. We are thus of the considered opinion that the delay in filing the first appeal(s) could be 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 applications, the same are allowed and delay in filing and re-filing the appeal, as mentioned above, is hereby condoned. However, the applicants shall not be entitled for interest for the period of delay in filing and re-filing the appeal. MAIN APPEAL At the outset, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment dated 31.05.2019 passed by this Court in a bunch of appeals, lead case of which was RFA No. 7108 of 2012, titled “Rampal and others (II) Versus Land Acquisition Collector and another”. [2] Learned counsel(s) for the respondents is not in a position to controvert the above factual position. [3] After going through the judgment referred to above as well as the present case, this Court agrees with the assertion of the learned counsel for the appellants. DINESH KUMAR 2026.02.12 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
       -4-     [4] Consequently, the present appeal is disposed off in the same terms as Rampal’s case (supra). [5] It is further added that the appellants shall not be entitled to interest for the period of delay in filing and re-filing the appeal. [6] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall stand(s) disposed off.
February 12, 2026 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) ‘dk kamra’ JUDGE



 




 



DINESH KUMAR 2026.02.12 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document