NOW DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS AND OTHERS HIS LRS AND OTHERS v. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS
Case Details
EFA-12-2025 (O&M) 2025 (O&M) [1 1] 207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH EFA-12- -2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 05.12.2025 Date of Decision: RAM SAWARUP @ RAM ROOP (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH RAM SAWARUP @ RAM ROOP (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH RAM SAWARUP @ RAM ROOP (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS AND OTHERS HIS LRS AND OTHERS ........ APPELLANTS Versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. RESPONDENTS ........ RESPONDENTS CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present:- Mr.Shivansh Malik, Advocate for the , Advocate for the appellants. Ms. Komal Sharma, DAG, Haryana. Ms. Komal Sharma, DAG, Haryana. Mr. H.S.Gill, Advocate for HSVP. Mr. H.S.Gill, Advocate for HSVP. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) 1. challenge has been made to an By way of present appeal challenge has been made to an challenge has been made to an order dated 30.09.2025 passed by learned Executing Court order dated at 0.09.2025 passed by learned Executing Court at Rohtak. 2. In the present case, some land owned by the appellants In the present case, some land owned by the appellants In the present case, some land owned by the appellants tate of Village Pehrawar, landowners situated within the revenue estate of Village Pehrawar, landowners situated within the revenue landowners situated within the revenue came to be acquired for the public purpose of carving District Rohtak, came to be acquired for the public purpose of carving came to be acquired for the public purpose of carving District Rohtak out of Sector 26, HSVP Rohtak. The Land Acquisition Collector vide out of Sector 26, HSVP Rohtak. The Land Acquisition Collector vide out of Sector 26, HSVP Rohtak. The Land Acquisition Collector vide out of Sector 26, HSVP Rohtak. The Land Acquisition Collector vide assessed its Award dated 03.07.2009 assessed its Award dated @ the market value @ the market value Rs.20,00,000/ 20,00,000/- per acre. 3. filed Being aggrieved thereof, the appellants-landowners filed Being aggrieved thereof, the appellants their objections, which were referred to the competent court vide LAC their objections, which were referred to the competent court vide LAC their objections, which were referred to the competent court vide LAC their objections, which were referred to the competent court vide LAC 7 and the Case No.855 of 2010. The same was decided on 31.05.2017 and the Case No.855 of 2010. The same was decided on 31.05.20 Case No.855 of 2010. The same was decided on 31.05.20 ANJAL GUPTA 2025.12.09 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document EFA-12-2025 (O&M) 2025 (O&M) [2 2] market value was enhanced to Rs.2 market value . Still enhanced to Rs.21,45,000/- per acre. Still peal wherein aggrieved, appellants No.1 to 11 filed Regular First Appeal wherein aggrieved, appellants No.1 to 11 filed Regular First Ap aggrieved, appellants No.1 to 11 filed Regular First Ap appellants No.12 to 15 were impleaded as proforma respondents. appellants No.12 to 15 were impleaded as proforma respondents. appellants No.12 to 15 were impleaded as proforma respondents. 4. Regular First Appeal (RFA No.5513 of 2017) The said Regular First Appeal (RFA No.5513 of 2017) Regular First Appeal (RFA No.5513 of 2017) was decided by this Court vide judgment dated 16.03.2022 and the was decided by this Court vide judgment dated 16.03.2022 and the was decided by this Court vide judgment dated 16.03.2022 and the was decided by this Court vide judgment dated 16.03.2022 and the ith market value was enhanced to Rs.42,51,000/- per acre alongwith market value was enhanced to Rs.42,51,000/ market value was enhanced to Rs.42,51,000/ benefits. other benefits. 5. ed on the aforesaid, all the appellants preferred Based on the aforesaid, all the appellants preferred ed on the aforesaid, all the appellants preferred Execution Petition No.678 of 2022 in LAC Case No.855 of 2010 and Execution Petition No.678 of 2022 in LAC Case No.855 of 2010 and Execution Petition No.678 of 2022 in LAC Case No.855 of 2010 and Execution Petition No.678 of 2022 in LAC Case No.855 of 2010 and RFA No.5513 of 2017. The said Execution Application has been RFA No.5513 of 2017. The said Execution Application has been RFA No.5513 of 2017. The said Execution Application has been RFA No.5513 of 2017. The said Execution Application has been
Decision
ing the order disposed of by the Learned Executing Court while passing the order disposed of by the Learned Executing Court while pass disposed of by the Learned Executing Court while pass dated 30.09.2025 whereby the Execution Petition with respect to dated 30.09.2025 whereby the Execution Petition with respect to dated 30.09.2025 whereby the Execution Petition with respect to dated 30.09.2025 whereby the Execution Petition with respect to appellants No.12 to 15 has been dismissed on the ground that they appellants No.12 to 15 has been dismissed on the ground that they appellants No.12 to 15 has been dismissed on the ground that they appellants No.12 to 15 has been dismissed on the ground that they were not the appellants before this Court in RFA No.5513 of 2017 were not the appellants before this Court in RFA No.5513 of 2017 were not the appellants before this Court in RFA No.5513 of 2017 were not the appellants before this Court in RFA No.5513 of 2017 the same has been whereas with respect to appellants No.1 to 11, the same has been whereas with respect to appellants No.1 to 11, whereas with respect to appellants No.1 to 11, disposed of with the direction to respondents disposed of with the direction to enhanced respondents to deposit the enhanced compensation amount within one month. It compensation the same order which amount within one month. It is the same order which has been impugned by way of present appeal. has been impugned by way of present appeal. has been impugned by way of present appeal. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records. gone through the records. 7. In terms of Order 41 Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, once the appellants No.1 Procedure, 1908 re impleaded as the appellants No.12 to 15 were impleaded as respondents No.3 to 7 in the Regular First Appeal bearing respondents No. RFA 3 to 7 in the Regular First Appeal bearing RFA No.5513 of 2017, the decision passed therein wit No.5513 of the 2017, the decision passed therein with respect to the enhanced and as compensation even applied to their rights as well and as compensation even applied to their rights ANJAL GUPTA 2025.12.09 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document EFA-12-2025 (O&M) 2025 (O&M) [3 3] ightly filed the execution application(s). Reference in this such, they rightly filed the execution application(s). Reference in this ightly filed the execution application(s). Reference in this such, they by this regard may be made to the order dated 01.12.2022 passed by this regard may be made to the order dated 01.12.2022 passed regard may be made to the order dated 01.12.2022 passed Court in RFA No.832 of 2022 relevant part of the said order RFA No.832 of 2022. The relevant part of the said order relevant part of the said order extracted hereinafter:- extracted hereinafter: “Sh. Dalel Singh, Sh. Subhash, Sh. Ramesh Kumar and Sh. Sh. Dalel Singh, Sh. Subhash, Sh. Ramesh Kumar and Sh. Sh. Dalel Singh, Sh. Subhash, Sh. Ramesh Kumar and Sh. Bijender Singh who are the sons of Sh. Lal Chand were joint owners Bijender Singh who are the sons of Sh. Lal Chand were joint owners Bijender Singh who are the sons of Sh. Lal Chand were joint owners Bijender Singh who are the sons of Sh. Lal Chand were joint owners of the property which was acquired by the State of Haryana. All the of the property which was acquired by the State of Haryana. All the of the property which was acquired by the State of Haryana. All the of the property which was acquired by the State of Haryana. All the noted above filed a joint application to the Collector under brothers noted above filed a joint application to the Collector under noted above filed a joint application to the Collector under brothers Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with a request to refer Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with a request to refer Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with a request to refer Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, with a request to refer the matter to the Court. On being referred, the Reference Court vide the matter to the Court. On being referred, the Reference Court vide the matter to the Court. On being referred, the Reference Court vide the matter to the Court. On being referred, the Reference Court vide LAC Case No.937 of 2010, decided on 30.10.2015, passed a LAC Case No.937 of 2010, decided on 30.10.2015, passed a LAC Case No.937 of 2010, decided on 30.10.2015, passed a LAC Case No.937 of 2010, decided on 30.10.2015, passed a common judgment deciding the joint claim of all the brothers. Sh. common judgment deciding the joint claim of all the brothers. Sh. common judgment deciding the joint claim of all the brothers. Sh. common judgment deciding the joint claim of all the brothers. Sh. Subhash, Sh. Ramesh Kumar and Sh. Bijender Singh filed an Subhash, Sh. Ramesh Kumar and Sh. Bijender Singh filed an Subhash, Sh. Ramesh Kumar and Sh. Bijender Singh filed an Subhash, Sh. Ramesh Kumar and Sh. Bijender Singh filed an appeal while Sh. Dalel Singh (appellant) was impleaded as proforma appeal while Sh. Dalel Singh (appellant) was impleaded as proforma appeal while Sh. Dalel Singh (appellant) was impleaded as proforma appeal while Sh. Dalel Singh (appellant) was impleaded as proforma respondent as he was not available for signing the required respondent as he was not available for signing the required respondent as he was not available for signing the required respondent as he was not available for signing the required ments. The appeal filed by the aforesaid three brothers was documents. The appeal filed by the aforesaid three brothers was ments. The appeal filed by the aforesaid three brothers was ments. The appeal filed by the aforesaid three brothers was allowed. This appeal has been filed by Sh. Dalel Singh claiming the allowed. This appeal has been filed by Sh. Dalel Singh claiming the allowed. This appeal has been filed by Sh. Dalel Singh claiming the allowed. This appeal has been filed by Sh. Dalel Singh claiming the same amount of compensation. In fact, the case of the appellant same amount of compensation. In fact, the case of the appellant same amount of compensation. In fact, the case of the appellant same amount of compensation. In fact, the case of the appellant remaining three brothers. already stands decided along with his remaining three brothers. already stands decided along with his already stands decided along with his Once a joint reference petition was filed by all the four brothers, Once a joint reference petition was filed by all the four brothers, Once a joint reference petition was filed by all the four brothers, Once a joint reference petition was filed by all the four brothers, which was decided by the Reference Court by a common judgment, which was decided by the Reference Court by a common judgment, which was decided by the Reference Court by a common judgment, which was decided by the Reference Court by a common judgment, then, the appeal, even if filed by only three brothers, shall enure to then, the appeal, even if filed by only three brothers, shall enure to then, the appeal, even if filed by only three brothers, shall enure to then, the appeal, even if filed by only three brothers, shall enure to in favour of the benefit of the appellant. There was a joint decree in favour of the benefit of the appellant. There was a joint decree the benefit of the appellant. There was a joint decree four brothers. It is not the case of the appellant that while filing the four brothers. It is not the case of the appellant that while filing the four brothers. It is not the case of the appellant that while filing the four brothers. It is not the case of the appellant that while filing the appeal by his brothers, the rights of appellant were relinquished or appeal by his brothers, the rights of appellant were relinquished or appeal by his brothers, the rights of appellant were relinquished or appeal by his brothers, the rights of appellant were relinquished or surrendered. surrendered. In such a situation, in terms of Order XLI Rule 4 of the Code In such a situation, in terms of Order XLI Rule 4 of the Code In such a situation, in terms of Order XLI Rule 4 of the Code 8, the appellant shall be deemed to be of Civil Procedure, 1908, the appellant shall be deemed to be 8, the appellant shall be deemed to be of Civil Procedure, 190 entitled to the same amount as payable to the remaining three entitled to the same amount as payable to the remaining three entitled to the same amount as payable to the remaining three entitled to the same amount as payable to the remaining three brothers in terms of judgment passed in Regular First Appeal brothers in terms of judgment passed in brothers in terms of judgment passed in Regular First Appeal No.458 of 2016, titled as “M/s Satkarta Realtors (P) Ltd. Vs. No.458 of 2016, titled as “M/s Satkarta Realtors (P) Ltd. Vs. No.458 of 2016, titled as “M/s Satkarta Realtors (P) Ltd. Vs. No.458 of 2016, titled as “M/s Satkarta Realtors (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana and others”. State of Haryana and others ANJAL GUPTA 2025.12.09 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document EFA-12-2025 (O&M) 2025 (O&M) [4 4] 8. In such circumstances, the order dated 30.09.2025 is set In such circumstances, the order dated 30.09.2025 is set In such circumstances, the order dated 30.09.2025 is set aside to the extent of dismissal of the execution aside to the extent of application preferred the execution application preferred at the instance of appellants No.12 to 15 and the learned Executing at the instance of appellants No.12 to 15 and the learned Executing at the instance of appellants No.12 to 15 and the learned Executing at the instance of appellants No.12 to 15 and the learned Executing on and Court is requested to entertain their Execution Application and Court is requested to entertain their Execution Applicati Court is requested to entertain their Execution Applicati towards release of enhanced proceed further in accordance with law towards release of enhanced proceed further in accordance with law proceed further in accordance with law compensation in terms of decision dated 16.03.2022 passed in RFA compensation in terms of decision dated 16.03.2022 passed in RFA compensation in terms of decision dated 16.03.2022 passed in RFA compensation in terms of decision dated 16.03.2022 passed in RFA ith respect to the release of compensation in No.5513 of 2017. With respect to the release of compensation in ith respect to the release of compensation in No.5513 of 2017 favour of appellants No.1 to 11, the learned State favour of appellants No.1 to 11 counsel informed learned State counsel informed that the amount stands deposited with the Executing Court the Court that the amount stands deposited with the Executing Court that the amount stands deposited with the Executing Court that the amount stands deposited with the Executing Court on 23.10.2025. on 23.10.2025. 9. The learned Executing Court is 9. The requested to release the Executing Court is thus requested to release the same in favour of appellants No.1 to 11 with immediate effect. The same in favour of appellants No.1 to 11 with immediate effect. The same in favour of appellants No.1 to 11 with immediate effect. The same in favour of appellants No.1 to 11 with immediate effect. The learned Executing Court is also requested to look into the fact learned Executi as to ng Court is also requested to look into the fact, as to department is whether the payment deposited by the respondent-department is whether the payment deposited by the respondent whether the payment deposited by the respondent /landholdings of the appellants and also commensurate to the shares/landholdings of the appellants and also /landholdings of the appellants and also commensurate to the shares carries upto date statutory interest. carries upto date statutory interest. isposed With all the observations the present appeal is disposed With all the observations th Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed 10. of. 11. of. 05.12.2025 05.12.2025 Anjal ( HARKESH MANUJA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Whether Reportable Yes/No ANJAL GUPTA 2025.12.09 17:34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document