CR No.2965 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 192 RAM LAL @ RAM LAL SHARMA AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Ms. Anita Balyan for the petitioners. Mr. Manish Dadwal, Asstt. A.G., Haryana. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) CM-9905-CII-2025 Prayer made in the application is for impleading the applicant(s) as legal heir(s) of petitioner No. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, subject to all just exceptions and the applicant(s) as mentioned in paragraph of the application are ordered to be impleaded as legal heir(s) (deceased) in order to pursue the present case. Main case [1]. 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 ‘Ram Lal and others vs. and in terms of directions issues by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others’. (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2965 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: RAM LAL SHARMA AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Ms. Anita Balyan Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Manish Dadwal, Asstt. A.G., Haryana. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) 2025 Prayer made in the application is for impleading the applicant(s) as petitioner No.3, who died on 21.11.2022. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, subject to all just exceptions and the applicant(s) as mentioned in paragraph of the application are ordered to be impleaded as legal heir(s) (deceased) in order to pursue the present case. 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 and others vs. State of Haryana and others terms of directions issues by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others’. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.2965 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.05.2025 RAM LAL SHARMA AND OTHERS ......Petitioner(s) ....Respondent(s) HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Manish Dadwal, Asstt. A.G., Haryana. Prayer made in the application is for impleading the applicant(s) as 21.11.2022. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, subject to all just exceptions and the applicant(s) as mentioned in paragraph No.2 of the application are ordered to be impleaded as legal heir(s) of petitioner No.3 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.29 of 2024 titled as others’ within a time bound period terms of directions issues by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others’. 1 Prayer made in the application is for impleading the applicant(s) as For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed, No.2 petitioner No.3 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 titled as within a time bound period terms of directions issues by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of MOHMED ATIK 2025.05.19 19:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CR No.2965 of 2025 [2]. Admittedly, certain land owned by the petitioners was notification dated 15.12.2006 and 14.12.2007 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, 1894 Act, which was decided by the Reference Court vide award dated 05.07.2014. [3]. Aggrieved thereof, 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 petitioners filed Execution Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Rohtak and the same for making payment of compensation to the petitioners, however, till date, the enhanced amount of compensation has not been disb other land owners. [4]. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being aggrieved of the non revision petition for 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 applicatio filed by the petitioners on (O&M) Admittedly, certain land owned by the petitioners was 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 and other persons were granted compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs Feeling dissatisfied, the land owners filed petition under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which was decided by the Reference Court vide award dated Aggrieved thereof, the petitioners 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 filed Execution Petition No.292/ 2022 Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Rohtak and the same for making payment of compensation to the petitioners, however, till date, the enhanced amount of compensation has not been disb other land owners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being aggrieved of the non-disbursal of amount of compensation revision petition for issuance of direction to the Executing Court 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 applicatio filed by the petitioners on 20.02.2024 is still pending and the petitioners are Admittedly, certain land owned by the petitioners was acquired vide 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 and other persons were granted compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs the land owners filed petition under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which was decided by the Reference Court vide award dated / 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 07.07.2022 before the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Rohtak and the same is now fixed for 30.01.2025 for making payment of compensation to the petitioners, however, till date, the enhanced 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 rection 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 (Annexure P is still pending and the petitioners are 2 acquired vide 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 and other persons were granted compensation to the tune of Rs.20 lakhs the land owners filed petition under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, which was decided by the Reference Court vide award dated filed Regular First Appeal before this Court, which was allowed vide order dated 16.03.2022 Later the on 07.07.2022 before the learned 30.01.2025 for making payment of compensation to the petitioners, however, till date, the ursed to the petitioners and Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners being filed the present concerned to I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper n (Annexure P-2) is still pending and the petitioners are MOHMED ATIK 2025.05.19 19:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CR No.2965 of 2025 waiting to get their 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 recording reasons in writing for such de [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.29 of 2024 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of next 0 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 of the execution [10]. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any shall also disposed of. May 16, 2025 Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable (O&M) waiting to get their amount of compensation on the basis of order dated 16.03.2022 passed by this Court. In Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and (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 de In view of above, the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak (the Executing Court) is requested to dispose of the Executing Petition as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of next 0 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 Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any shall also disposed of. Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No waiting to get their amount of compensation on the basis of order dated 16.03.2022 Rahul S. Shah vs. Jinendra Kumar Gandhi and others reported ’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.” In view of above, the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak (the Executing Court) is requested to dispose of the Executing Petition as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of next 0 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 expression of opinion on the merits of the execution proceedings. Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 3 waiting to get their amount of compensation on the basis of order dated 16.03.2022 reported “That the executing Court must dispose of execution proceedings within 6 months from the date of filing which may be In view of above, the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak (the Executing Court) is requested to dispose of the Executing Petition 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 Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending MOHMED ATIK 2025.05.19 19:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment