Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 43199 (PNJ)

SATBIR AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

CR/2141/2025 · 2025-04-09

Harkesh Manuja

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CR No.2141 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 188 SATBIR AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Present: Mr. for the petitioner Mr. Manish Dadwal, Asstt. A.G., Haryana. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) [1]. By way of of India read with Section 115 CPC, prayer has been made for issuance of direction to the learned Executing Court to decide the Execution No. 26.08.2022 titled as ‘ time bound period case of ‘Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others “(2021) 6 SCC 418 [2]. Admittedly, certain land owned by the petitioners was acquired vide notification dated 15.12.2006 and 14.12.2007 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the 1894 Act’) respectively, followed by an award dated 03.07.2009 petitioners and other persons were granted compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs per acre. Feeling dissatisfied, the land owners filed petition under Section 18 of the (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2141 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: SATBIR AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Mr. Shivansh Malik, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Manish Dadwal, Asstt. A.G., Haryana. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) By way of present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 115 CPC, prayer has been made for issuance of direction to the learned Executing Court to decide the Execution No. titled as ‘Satbir and others vs. State of Haryana and time bound period in view of directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others (2021) 6 SCC 418”. Admittedly, certain land owned by the petitioners was acquired vide notification dated 15.12.2006 and 14.12.2007 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the 1894 Act’) respectively, followed by an award dated 03.07.2009 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, whereby the petitioners and other persons were granted compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs per acre. Feeling dissatisfied, the land owners filed petition under Section 18 of the IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2141 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.04.2025 ......Petitioners ....Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Manish Dadwal, Asstt. A.G., Haryana. present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 115 CPC, prayer has been made for issuance of direction to the learned Executing Court to decide the Execution No.502/2022 dated vs. State of Haryana and others’ within a in view of directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others’ reported as Admittedly, certain land owned by the petitioners was acquired vide notification dated 15.12.2006 and 14.12.2007 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the 1894 Act’) respectively, followed by an passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, whereby the petitioners and other persons were granted compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs per acre. Feeling dissatisfied, the land owners filed petition under Section 18 of the 1 present petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 115 CPC, prayer has been made for issuance of direction /2022 dated within a in view of directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the reported as Admittedly, certain land owned by the petitioners was acquired vide notification dated 15.12.2006 and 14.12.2007 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘the 1894 Act’) respectively, followed by an passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, whereby the petitioners and other persons were granted compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs per acre. Feeling dissatisfied, the land owners filed petition under Section 18 of the MOHMED ATIK 2025.04.09 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CR No.2141 of 2025 1894 Act, which was decided by t 05.07.2014. [3]. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioners / land owners filed Regular First Appeal before this Court, which was allowed vide order dated 16.03.2022 enhancing the compensation to the tune of Rs.42.51 lakh per petitioners filed Execution Petition No. Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Rohtak and the same is making payment of compensation to the petitioners, however, till date, the enhanced amount of compensation has not been disbursed to the petitioners and other land owners. [4]. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being aggrieved of the non revision petition for issuance of direction to the Executing Court concerned to decide the execution application expeditiously, in a time bound manner. [5]. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book. [6]. A perusal of record shows that execution application filed by the petitioners on 26.08 amount of compensation on the basis of order dated 16.03.2022 passed by this Court. [7]. In as (2021) 6 SCC 418 proceedings within 6 months from the date of filing which may be extended only by reco (O&M) 1894 Act, which was decided by the Reference Court vide award dated Aggrieved thereof, the petitioners / land owners filed Regular First Appeal before this Court, which was allowed vide order dated 16.03.2022 enhancing the compensation to the tune of Rs.42.51 lakh per petitioners filed Execution Petition No.502/2022 on Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Rohtak and the same is making payment of compensation to the petitioners, however, till date, the nced amount of compensation has not been disbursed to the petitioners and other land owners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being aggrieved of the non-disbursal of amount of compensation have filed the present sion petition for issuance of direction to the Executing Court concerned to decide the execution application expeditiously, in a time bound manner. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper A perusal of record shows that execution application filed by the 26.08.2022 is still pending and the petitioners are waiting to get their amount of compensation on the basis of order dated 16.03.2022 passed by this In Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others (2021) 6 SCC 418 the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as follows: “That the executing Court must dispose of execution proceedings within 6 months from the date of filing which may be extended only by recording reasons in writing for such delay.” he Reference Court vide award dated Aggrieved thereof, the petitioners / land owners filed Regular First Appeal before this Court, which was allowed vide order dated 16.03.2022 enhancing the compensation to the tune of Rs.42.51 lakh per acre. Later the 2022 on 26.08.2022 before the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Rohtak and the same is pending since then making payment of compensation to the petitioners, however, till date, the nced amount of compensation has not been disbursed to the petitioners and Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being disbursal of amount of compensation have filed the present sion petition for issuance of direction to the Executing Court concerned to decide the execution application expeditiously, in a time bound manner. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper A perusal of record shows that execution application filed by the .2022 is still pending and the petitioners are waiting to get their amount of compensation on the basis of order dated 16.03.2022 passed by this . Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others reported the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as follows:- “That the executing Court must dispose of execution proceedings within 6 months from the date of filing which may be rding reasons in writing for such delay.” 2 he Reference Court vide award dated Aggrieved thereof, the petitioners / land owners filed Regular First Appeal before this Court, which was allowed vide order dated 16.03.2022 acre. Later the .2022 before the learned for making payment of compensation to the petitioners, however, till date, the nced amount of compensation has not been disbursed to the petitioners and Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being disbursal of amount of compensation have filed the present sion petition for issuance of direction to the Executing Court concerned to I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper A perusal of record shows that execution application filed by the .2022 is still pending and the petitioners are waiting to get their amount of compensation on the basis of order dated 16.03.2022 passed by this reported “That the executing Court must dispose of execution proceedings within 6 months from the date of filing which may be MOHMED ATIK 2025.04.09 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CR No.2141 of 2025 [8]. In view of above, the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak (the Executing Court) is requested to dispose of the Executing Petition No.502/2022 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a months from today, as any further delay is going to cause serious prejudice to the rights of the petitioners/land owners. [9]. It is made clear that nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits [10]. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any shall also disposed of. April 09, 2025 Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable (O&M) In view of above, the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak (the Executing Court) is requested to dispose of the Executing Petition /2022 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a months from today, as any further delay is going to cause serious prejudice to the rights of the petitioners/land owners. It is made clear that nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the execution proceedings. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any shall also disposed of. (HARKESH MANUJA) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No In view of above, the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak (the Executing Court) is requested to dispose of the Executing Petition /2022 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of next 04 months from today, as any further delay is going to cause serious prejudice to the It is made clear that nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an of the execution proceedings. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 3 In view of above, the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak (the Executing Court) is requested to dispose of the Executing Petition period of next 04 months from today, as any further delay is going to cause serious prejudice to the It is made clear that nothing said hereinabove shall be construed as an Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending MOHMED ATIK 2025.04.09 18:06 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment