LexSH. RAM CHANDER (DEAD) THR LRS versus UNION OF INDIA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 614 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R. [2022] 17 S.C.R. 614 614 SH. RAM CHANDER (DEAD) THR LRS v. UNION OF INDIA (Civil Appeal Nos. 2926 - 2927 of 2022) APRIL 20, 2022 [M. R. SHAH AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.] Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – High Court vide order dated 12.05.2017 allowed the review petitions filed by Union of India and recalled the judgment and order dated 19.10.2001 determining the compensation at Rs. 2000/- per sq. yard relying upon the decision in the case of Bhola Nath, solely on the ground that the decision in the case of Bhola Nath which was relied upon by the High Court was set aside by Supreme Court vide order dated 08.12.2010 – Appellants-land owners filed recall applications, Division Bench refused to recall the order dated 12.05.2017 – On appeal, held: High Court recalled the judgment and order dated 19.10.2001 passed in the regular first appeals solely on the ground that the judgment in the case of Bhola Nath, which was relied upon while passing judgment and order dated 19.10.2001 in Regular First Appeal No. 416/1986 and other allied first appeals was set aside by Supreme Court vide judgment and order dated 08.12.2010 and the matter was remanded – However, it is required to be noted that during the pendency of the review petitions, on remand again the High Court decided the first appeals in the case of Bhola Nath vide judgment and order dated 23.03.2016 and again determined the compensation at Rs. 2000/- per sq. yard – Even against the subsequent judgment and order dated 23.03.2016, the SLP preferred by the DDA was dismissed by Supreme Court vide order dated 06.04.2017 – Therefore, when review applications/petitions were allowed on 12.05.2017 on the ground that pursuant to the decision of this Court in the case of DDA Vs. Bhola Nath Sharma dated 08.12.2010, the first appeals are remanded and pending, in fact there was already a decision on remand vide judgment and order dated 23.03.2016 and even the SLP was dismissed – Therefore, the ground on which the High Court had allowed the review applications was thereafter not available – Impugned judgment and order dated 12.05.2017 in R.P. No.309/2008 in RFA No.416/1986 and the order A B C D E F G H 615 dated 07.07.2017 in CMA No.23091/2017 in R.P. No. 309/2008 in RFA No. 416/1986 and impugned judgment and order in R.P. No. 310/2008 in RFA No. 453/1986, allowing review petition and recalling judgment and order dated 19.10.2001 in RFA Nos. 416/ 1986 and 453/1986, are quashed and set aside – Consequently, common judgment and order passed by the High Court dated 19.10.2001 in RFA Nos.416/1986 and 453/1986 are restored. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The Court have gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court in Review Petition Nos. 309/2008 and 310/2008 in respective Regular First Appeal Nos. 416/1986 & 453/1986. From the orders passed by the High Court allowing the review applications and recalling the earlier judgment and order dated 19.10.2001 passed in RFA Nos. 416/ 1986 & 453/1986, it appears that the High Court has recalled the judgment and order dated 19.10.2001 passed in the aforesaid regular first appeals solely on the ground that the judgment in the case of Bhola Nath, which was relied upon while passing judgment and order dated 19.10.2001 in Regular First Appeal No. 416/1986 and other allied first appeals was set aside by this Court vide judgment and order dated 08.12.2010 and the matter was remanded. However, it is required to be noted that during the pendency of the review petitions, on remand again the High Court decided the first appeals in the case of Bhola Nath vide judgment and order dated 23.03.2016 and again determined the compensation at Rs. 2000/- per sq. yard. Even against the subsequent judgment and order dated 23.03.2016, the SLP preferred by the DDA has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 06.04.2017. Therefore, when review applications/ petitions were allowed on 12.05.2017 on the ground that pursuant to the decision of this Court in the case of DDA Vs. Bhola Nath Sharma dated 08.12.2010, the first appeals are remanded and pending, in fact there was already a decision on remand vide judgment and order dated 23.03.2016 and even the SLP was dismissed. Therefore, the ground on which the High Court had allowed the review applications was thereafter not available. Under the circumstances, and in view of the subsequent development, which was even pointed out to the Hig
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.