RAVINDER PAL SINGH RAVINDER PAL SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
Case Details
1 160 2023 CWP-3581-2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-3581-2023 2023 September 17, 2025 Date of Decision: September 17, 2025 Date of Decision: RAVINDER PAL SINGH RAVINDER PAL SINGH Petitioner ........Petitioner Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS .......Respondents
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: petitioner. Mr. Navmohit, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Navmohit, Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Abhinash Jain, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Siddhanth Arora, Advocate for Mr. Siddhanth Arora, Advocate for Mr. Siddhanth Arora, Advocate for Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate for respondent No.2. Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate for respondent No.2. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) HARKESH MANUJA **** By way of present Writ Petition, prayer has been made for By way of present Writ Petition, prayer has been made for way of present Writ Petition, prayer has been made for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to pay issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to pay issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to pay issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents to pay landowner as contemplated under Section statutory interest to the petitioner-landowner as contemplated under Section landowner as contemplated under Section statutory interest 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1894 Act’) on 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1894 Act’) on 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1894 Act’) on 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘1894 Act’) on account of delayed disbursal of compensation. account of delayed disbursal of compensation. 2. In the present case, some land owned by the petitioner forming In the present case, some land owned by the petitioner forming In the present case, some land owned by the petitioner forming In the present case, some land owned by the petitioner forming venue estate of Village Gulab Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhari, District part of revenue estate of Village Gulab Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhari, District venue estate of Village Gulab Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhari, District venue estate of Village Gulab Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar was acquired vide notification dated 30.05.2005 and Yamuna Nagar was acquired vide notification dated 30.05.2005 and Yamuna Nagar was acquired vide notification dated 30.05.2005 and Yamuna Nagar was acquired vide notification dated 30.05.2005 and 22.05.2006 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act respectively 22.05.2006 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act respectively 22.05.2006 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act respectively 22.05.2006 issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the 1894 Act respectively the land was taken followed by an award dated 16.07.2007. The possession of the land was taken followed by an award dated 16.07.2007. The possession of followed by an award dated 16.07.2007. The possession of over by the respondents on the same day i.e. the day of passing of award, over by the respondents on the same day i.e. the day of passing of award, over by the respondents on the same day i.e. the day of passing of award, over by the respondents on the same day i.e. the day of passing of award, however, the compensation was released to the petitioner on 27.12.2022 only however, the compensation was released to the petitioner on 27.12.2022 only however, the compensation was released to the petitioner on 27.12.2022 only however, the compensation was released to the petitioner on 27.12.2022 only i.e. after a gap of 15 years, 5 months and 12 days. In such circumstances, the i.e. after a gap of 15 years, 5 months and 12 days. In such circumstances, the i.e. after a gap of 15 years, 5 months and 12 days. In such circumstances, the i.e. after a gap of 15 years, 5 months and 12 days. In such circumstances, the ner prays for grant of interest as contemplated under Section 34 of the petitioner prays for grant of interest as contemplated under Section 34 of the ner prays for grant of interest as contemplated under Section 34 of the ner prays for grant of interest as contemplated under Section 34 of the TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.19 23:11 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 CWP-3581-2023 1894 Act for the period between the passing of the award till the date of disbursal of compensation i.e. 16.07.2007 to 27.12.2022. 3. On the other hand, no response has been filed on behalf of respondent No.2. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 3 submits that the affidavit of ownership was furnished by the petitioner before the Land Acquisition Collector only on 21.05.2020 and the payment was released to him thereafter on 27.12.2022 and thus, there was no delay on the part of respondents and the present writ petition was thus, liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner. 5. In the present case, the undisputed facts are that the land in question was purchased by the petitioner vide registered sale deed dated 24.01.2005 followed by mutation entered in his name on 25.07.2007 and thus, the same was prior to the date of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act. The award in the present case was passed on 16.07.2007 and possession of the land was also taken over there and then as per the award and also in terms of Rapat Rozamcha No. 1995 dated 16.07.2007 whereas, the compensation was released on 27.12.2022 i.e. after an inordinate delay of 15 years, 5 months and 12 days. No merit can be found in the submission made on behalf of respondent No.3 to the effect that the petitioner was not entitled for the benefit of statutory interest under Section 34 of 1894 Act for the period between the date of passing of the award till the date of actual disbursement i.e. 27.12.2022 as the petitioner furnished the affidavit with respect to his title in the property in question only on 21.05.2020. In case there was any confusion with the Collector towards the rightful entitlement of compensation amount, he was supposed to deposit the same with the Reference Court in terms of TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.19 23:11 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 CWP-3581-2023 Section 31(1) of 1894 Act and the same could have been invested by the Court concerned in some Government security etc. as per section 32(1) of 1894 Act. 6. In such circumstances, respondent No.3 who failed to offer the amount of compensation to the petitioner-landowner at the time of taking over of possession on 16.07.2007 and even failed to deposit the same with the Reference Court, cannot avoid its liability to pay statutory interest in terms of Section 34 of 1894 Act to the petitioner-landowner for the period between 16.07.2007 i.e. the date of taking over of possession of the acquired land till the date of disbursal of actual compensation on 27.12.2022. Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid discussion, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is held entitled for grant of statutory interest payable under Section 34 of 1894 Act from 16.07.2007 till 27.12.2022. 7. In such circumstances, the present writ petition is allowed in view of the aforesaid terms. The necessary calculation towards the interest payable in favour of petitioner-landowner be made within 4 weeks from today and the same be disbursed to him within 4 weeks thereafter. It is made clear that in case the needful is not done in the aforesaid manner, the respondent No.2 shall be liable to pay Rs.1,00,000/- from his own pocket to the petitioners- landowners for delay in disbursal of the statutory interest. 17.09.2025 Tejwinder (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable Yes/No Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2025.09.19 23:11 I agree to specified portions of this document