Harish Kumar & Ors v. U O India & Ors

ORDER %

16.10.2012 i LA.APP No. 262/2012 & CM No.17960/2012 (u/O 41 R 5 r/w Sec. 151 CPC) In proceedingsunder Section 30-31 of Land AcquisitionAct, appellants were Interested Party No. 2 & 3 whereas contesting respondentswere InterestedParty No. 9 to 12 (henceforthreferredto as IPs). Impugnedjudgmentof 11^*^ July, 2012 answersthe reference seeking apportionmentof compensationin favour of respondents/ I.P.No.9 to 12, which is under challenge in this appeal. j Learned counsel for appellantsrelies upon Section 123 of The TransferofPropertyAct, 1882to assertthatno mortgageecan becbme owner of the mortgagedproperty and as per the revenue record i.e. Jamabandiofthe year 1986-87,respondents/I.P.No.9to 12 haveieen shown to be mortgagers and so, grant of entire compensation to respondents/I.P.No.9 to 12 by theReferenceCourtis unsustainable. LA.APPNo. 262/2012 Page 1 Upon hearing learned counsel for appellantsand on perusal of the impugnedjudgment and the materialon record, it emergesthat the Jamabandi of the year 1986-87 has to be read as a whole. Reference Court in the impugnedjudgment has considered aforesaid Jamabandi of the year 1986-87 in its entirety and has returned a categoric finding, i which is as under :- '/« jamabandi for the year 1986-87 Ex. IP10/8 and \ Ex.IP2-8W3/l, it is mentioned that vide order dated i

07.02.89 passed by Naib Tehsildar (North), the name of Mam Chand S/o Girdharli was corrected from "Rahim" i.e. I "Mortgagor" to "Wahib" i.e. "donar".' I At the hearing, learned counsel for appellants had failed to assail aforesaid finding, which clearly shows that the status of 'mortgager' had changed to that of 'donor' and so, reliance placed upon Section I 123 of The Transfer ofProperty Act, 1882 is clearly misplaced. i Upon finding that there is no meaningful challenge to the impugned judgment, I dismiss this appeal and the application for interim relief in limine, with no order as to costs. H "^tS^NILGAuIr) JUDGE OCTOBER 16, 2012 rs LAAPP No. 262/2012 Page 2

r-: *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LA.APP. 262/2012 HARISH KUMAR &ORS. Appellants Through; Mr. SanjayAggarwal,Advocate I versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sahay,Advocate; CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR