Manmohan Sarin, J.

1. By this common judgment, we would be disposing of the above four Letters Patent Appeals for enhancement of compensation in respect of land at Village Bahapur, which had been acquired. The present Letters Patent Appeals are against the judgments of the learned Single Judge of this Court in Regular First Appeals.

2. The land in question at Village Bahapur was acquired pursuant to the notification under Section 4 dated 13.11.59, issued under the Land Acquisition Act. In due course, the Land Acquisition Collector made awards of compensation. Compensation was awarded @ Rs. 2,000 per Bigha. On reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Additional District Judge, the compensation was increased ranging between Rs. 4,500 and Rs. 11,000 per Bigha. Dissatisfied with the enhancement in compensation, the appellants had filed Regular First Appeals in this Court. In case of land which is the subject matter of L.P.As 230/79 and 190/79, compensation was enhanced to Rs. 7,000 and Rs. 7,500 per Bigha respectively. In respect of land which is the subject matter of L.P.As. 65/80 and 34/80, the Regular First Appeals were dismissed. In the above two cases, the Additional District Judge had already awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 11,000 per Bigha.

3. For facility of reference, we are giving below the area covered under the appeals preferred, the rate of compensation as awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector and the enhancement granted in reference by the Additional District Judge and in appeal by the learned Single Judge. The rate at which compensation was originally sought in the L.P.A. when filed is also given in the table.

No. ofDate Vill.Area forRate ofRate ofRateRateRate

Appealof Sec.

4 Noti.

Awardedwhich

Comp.

by LACComp.

Awarded

by ADJComp.

Awarded

in RFAClaimed/

AwardedClaimed

in LPAClaimed

as per

amend.

LPA.13.11.59 Bahapur23 Bigha2000/-4500/-15,000/-15,000/-20,000/-

230/792 Biswasper Bighaawarded

7000/-per bigha

LPA.

190/80-Do- -Do-4.5 Bighas

15 Biswas2000/-4500/-15,000/-

awarded

7500/-15,000/-20,000/-

LPA-Do- -Do-81 Bighas2000/-11,000/-Sought17,000/-20,000/-

65/8017/60

Biswas17,000/-

RFA

Dismissed

LPA-Do- -Do-30 Bighas2000/-11,000/-Sought17,000/-20,000/-

34/8017,000/-

RFA

Dismissed





The appellants had moved applications seeking to enhance the claim in appeal to Rs. 20,000 per Bigha and for being permitted to pay deficit Court fee.

4. We have heard Mr. Ravinder Narain and Mr. S.C. Dhamija, Advocates for the appellants in the four appeals. Learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the land in question at Village Bahapur was eminently fit for development into residential colony in the same manner as the appellants had developed the Colony Greater Kailash I. In fact, the appellants colony at Greater Kailash could easily have been extended to the acquired land and the plots could be similarly earmarked and developed. Learned Counsel argued that the land in question was even superior to the land at Sri Fort near Panchsheel where development took place much later and wherein RFA 282/68 compensation had been awarded @ Rs. 20,000 per Bigha. Learned Counsel relied on a decision of Division Bench of this Court in RFA 115/73 with RFA (Cross Appeal) 193/73 dated 27.10.94 in the case of DLF Universal Limited v. Union of India. The said decision covers case for compensation in this very village covered by the same notification under Section 4 dated 13.11.1959. In the aforesaid appeal, Division Bench of this Court relying on the earlier decision of this Court in RFA 408/77 titled Union of India v. Amin Chand and Others dated 9.7.1979, RFA 463/79 titled Chhajju v. Union of India dated 3.12.1979 fixed the market value of land at Rs. 19,000. The Court in the said decision also permitted enhancement of the claim in appeal by payment of deficient Court fee.

5. Mr. S.S. Sabharwal, Counsel appearing for the Union of India, in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in RFA 115/73 with R.F.A. (Cross Appeal) 193/93 did not seriously question the rate of compensation as determined by this Court. However, he strongly opposed the appellants being permitted to claim compensation at enhanced rate of Rs. 20,000 per Bigha and make good the deficiency in Court fee. He urged that appellants claim should be confined to the rate of Rs. 15,000 and Rs. 17,000 as originally claimed in the L.P.As.

6. The appellants had moved CM 2008/96 in LPA 230/79; CM 2009/96 in LPA.190/79; CM2010/96 in LPA.34/80; and CM 2011/96 in LPA. 65/80. By these applications the appellants had sought permission of the Court to claim compensation at the rate of Rs. 20,000 per Bigha based on the ground that erroneously a lower amount had been claimed and market value of similarly acquired lands had been valued at higher rates. The appellants also sought permission to make good the deficiency in Court-fee. Learned Counsel for the respondents relied on a decision of the Apex Court in Buta Singh (dead) by L.Rs. v. Union of India, (AIR 1995 SC 1945 [LQ/SC/1995/515] ), wherein the Apex Court declined the prayer for being permitted for extension of time to make good the deficiency in Court fee under Section 149 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Apex Court observed:

But if in appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act the amount is initially kept low and then depending upon the mood of the Appellate Court payment of deficient Court fee is sought to be made. It would create unhealthy practice and it would become a game of chess and a matter of chance, that practice would not be conducive and proper for orderly conduct of litigation.

7. The Court held that there were not bona fides on the part of the appellant and the aid of Section 149 could only be taken when the party was not able to pay Court fee in circumstances beyond control or unavoidable circumstances. The Court rejected the application for permission to pay deficient Court-fee.

8. Mr. Ravinder Narain, learned Counsel, submitted in reply that the case of Buta Singh was not applicable to the facts of the present case. In Buta Singhs case it was only after arguments had been heard and judgment was reserved that the parties sought to make application for permission of deficient Court fee. Learned Counsel relied on decision of the Apex Court in Harcharan v. State of Haryana, AIR 1983 SC 43 [LQ/SC/1982/168] . Reliance was also placed on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Narmada Devi, etc. v. Union of India, (CM. 16/96 in RFA. 266/84 decided on 25.4.96). The Division Bench after considering the decisions in Harcharan v. State of Haryana (Supra), Bhag Singh and Others v. Union of Territory of Chandigarh, AIR 1985 SC 1576 [LQ/SC/1985/255] ; and The Scheduled Caste Co-operative Land Owning Society Ltd., Bhatinda v. Union of India and Others, AIR 1991 SC 730 [LQ/SC/1990/554] , as well as Buta Singhs case held that since the application under Order VI Rule 17, CPC had been made before the appeals came up for hearing, the case would be covered by the observations of the Apex Court in Bhag Singhs case and Buta Singhscase would not be applicable. We are in agreement with the views expressed by the Division Bench of this Court in Smt. Narmada Devi, etc. v. Union of India (supra) holding that where a party claiming enhanced market value keeps the matter alive than before the decision of the appeal, it would be entitled to get the market value even if it amounted to a higher amount. The amendment applications moved by the appellants viz. CM. 2008/96 in LPA. 230/79, CM 2009/96 in LPA 190/79. CM 2010/96 in LPA 34/80 and CM 2011/96 in LPA 65/80 for claiming enhanced amount of compensation @ Rs. 20,000 per Bigha and for payment of deficit Court fee are, therefore, allowed, subject to payment of Rs. 7,500 each as costs to be paid to the Delhi Legal Services Authority.

9. In view of the foregoing discussion, we allow the appeals and fix the market value of the land in question at Rs. 19,000 per Bigha. The appellants shall also be entitled to solatium @ 15% and interest @ 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of possession till the date of payment. The appellants shall also pay deficiency in Court fee within four weeks as well as the costs ordered to be paid the Delhi Legal Services Authority. The decrees would be drawn up thereafter only.