# HARPAL SINGH AND ANR. ETC. ETC v. STATE OF PUNJAB ETC. ETC

- **Citation:** [2022] 4 S.C.R. 874
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2022-09-23
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal Nos. 6744-6758 of 2022
- **Bench:** M. R. Shah, Krishna Murari
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/harpal-singh-and-anr-etc-etc-v-state-of-punjab-etc-etc-36344
- **Pages:** 5

## Headnote

Land Acquisition - Compensation - Determination of - Held:
While determining the compensation by the impugned common
judgment and order/s, the High Court relied upon its earlier decisions
in the cases of Surjit Singh & Kapoor Singh - Aforesaid decisions of
the High Court were the subject matter of appeals before Supreme
Court wherein the compensation was further enhanced -
Landowners in the present appeals are also similarly situated -
Accordingly, the amount of compensation payable to the landowners
is enhanced by a further sum of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre in C.A.
arising out of RFA No.1614 of 2000 and by Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre
in remaining Civil Appeals - Further, original landowners shall be
entitled to solatium as prescribed under the statute on the enhanced
amount of compensation - However, they shall not be entitled to
any statutory benefits including the interest under the Act from the
date of respective judgments and orders passed by the High Court
till the filing of the appeals in Supreme Court.
Kapoor Singh v. State of Punjab & Another Etc. and
Surjit Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. Etc. Common
order of Supreme Court dtd. 15.01.2014 passed in
Civil Appeal Nos. 738-748/2014 and Civil Appeal No.
363/2013 - relied on.
Surjit Singh v. State of Punjab & Another Decision of
High Court dtd. 2.3.2009 in RFA No. 3004/2006;
Kapoor Singh v. The State of Punjab & Another
Decision of High Court dtd. 28.01.2010 in RFA No.
2348/1998 - referred to.

## Text

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
874
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 4 S.C.R.
HARPAL SINGH AND ANR. ETC. ETC.
v.
STATE OF PUNJAB ETC. ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 6744-6758 of 2022)
SEPTEMBER 23, 2022
[M. R. SHAH AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.]
Land Acquisition - Compensation - Determination of - Held:
While determining the compensation by the impugned common
judgment and order/s, the High Court relied upon its earlier decisions
in the cases of Surjit Singh & Kapoor Singh - Aforesaid decisions of
the High Court were the subject matter of appeals before Supreme
Court wherein the compensation was further enhanced -
Landowners in the present appeals are also similarly situated -
Accordingly, the amount of compensation payable to the landowners
is enhanced by a further sum of Rs.1,00,000/- per acre in C.A.
arising out of RFA No.1614 of 2000 and by Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre
in remaining Civil Appeals - Further, original landowners shall be
entitled to solatium as prescribed under the statute on the enhanced
amount of compensation - However, they shall not be entitled to
any statutory benefits including the interest under the Act from the
date of respective judgments and orders passed by the High Court
till the filing of the appeals in Supreme Court.
Kapoor Singh v. State of Punjab & Another Etc. and
Surjit Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. Etc. Common
order of Supreme Court dtd. 15.01.2014 passed in
Civil Appeal Nos. 738-748/2014 and Civil Appeal No.
363/2013 - relied on.
Surjit Singh v. State of Punjab & Another Decision of
High Court dtd. 2.3.2009 in RFA No. 3004/2006;
Kapoor Singh v. The State of Punjab & Another
Decision of High Court dtd. 28.01.2010 in RFA No.
2348/1998 - referred to.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 67446758 of 2022.
[2022] 4 S.C.R. 874
874
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
875
From the Judgment and Order dated 01.05.2012 of the High
Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in RFAs No. 3941-3949,
3952, 3953, 4485 of 2007 and 1448, 2871, 3974 of 2008.
With
Civil Appeal Nos. 6740-6743, 6734-6739 of 2022
Rameshwar Singh Malik, Sr. Adv., Naresh Kaushal, Dinesh
Verma, Subhasish Bhowmick, Somvir Singh Deswal, Satbir Singh Pillania,
Kuldeep Singh Bhakar, Diwan Singh Chauhan, Nischal Kumar Neeraj,
Amit Kumar Saroha, Ravindra Bana, Advs. for the Appellants.
Ms. Rooh-e-hina Dua, Harshit Khanduja, Kanishak Bunderwal,
Ashok K. Mahajan, Dr. Monika Gusain, Avi Dhankhar, Advs. for the
Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. As common question of law and facts arise in these group of
appeals, all these appeals are being decided and disposed of by this
common judgment and order.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common
judgment(s) and order(s) dated 01.05.2012 / 02.03.2009 / 09.11.2009
passed in the respective first appeals, the particulars of which are as
under:-
Sl.
No.
Particulars
RFA No.
Date of Order
Section 4
Notification
date
1.
Harpal Singh and Anr. Vs. State of
Punjab
3941/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
2.
Parkash Singh (Dead) Thr. LRs.
Vs. State of Punjab
3942/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
3.
Ajaib Singh and Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab
3943/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
4.
Gian Singh and Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab and Anr.
3944/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
5.
Amirk Singh and Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab
3945/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
6.
Parkash Singh (Dead) Thr. LRs.
and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab
3946/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
7.
Bakhtaur Singh (Dead) Thr. LRs.
Vs. State of Punjab and Ors.
3947/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
HARPAL SINGH AND ANR. ETC. ETC. v. STATE OF PUNJAB
ETC. ETC.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
876
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 4 S.C.R.
1.
Bachan Singh (Dead) Thr. LRs. Vs.
State of Punjab
3948/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
2.
Labh Singh (Dead) Thr. LRs. and
Anr. Vs. State of Punjab
3949/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
3.
Ajmer Singh and Anr. Vs. State of
Punjab
3952/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
4.
Sajjan Singh Vs. State of Punjab
3953/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
5.
Tarlochan Singh and Ors. Vs. State
of Punjab and Ors.
4485/2007
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
6.
Gurdev Singh and Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab and Anr.
1448/2008
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
7.
Amar Singh and Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab
2871/2008
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
8.
Gurdip Singh and Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab
3974/2008
01.05.2012
21.11.2002
9.
Mehar Singh and Anr. Vs. State of
Punjab
784/2007
02.03.2009
21.02.2000
10.
Mewa Singh (Dead) and Ors. Vs.
State of Punjab
783/2007
02.03.2009
21.02.2000
11.
Jagir Singh (dead) and Ors. Vs.
State of Punjab
2715/2007
02.03.2009
21.02.2000
12.
Norata Singh (Dead) and Ors. Vs.
State of Punjab
4319/2006
02.03.2009
21.02.2000
13.
Hardial Singh (Dead) and Ors. Vs.
State of Punjab and Anr.
4300/2006
09.11.2009
21.02.2000
14.
Jagir Singh (Dead) and Ors. Vs.
State of Punjab and Anr.
1614/2000
28.01.2010
21.02.2000
15.
Nasib Singh and Anr. Vs. State of
Punjab and Ors.
3112/2005
02.03.2009
21.02.2000
16.
Sher Singh (Dead) Thr. LRs. and
Anr. Vs. State of Punjab
4318/2006
02.03.2009
21.02.2000
17.
Manjit Kaur Vs. State of Punjab
and Anr.
4088/2007
02.03.2009
21.02.2000
18.
Karnail Singh and Ors. Vs. State of
Punjab and Anr.
1468/2008
09.11.2009
21.02.2000
determining the compensation @ Rs. 19,85,700/- per acre in respective
first appeals, except RFA No. 1614 of 2000, the original claimants/
landowners have preferred the present appeals.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
877
2.1 In RFA No.1614 of 2000, the High Court has awarded the
compensation @ Rs. 7,80,000/- per acre.
3. At the outset, it is required to be noted that while determining
the amount of compensation @ Rs. 19,85,700/- per acre in the respective
first appeals, the High Court has relied upon its earlier decision in the
case of Surjit Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Another (RFA No. 3004/
2006 decided on 2.3.2009). So far as Civil Appeal arising out of RFA
No. 1614 of 2000 is concerned, the High Court has determined the amount
of compensation @ Rs. 7,80,000/- per acre alongwith solatium relying
upon its earlier decision in the case of Kapoor Singh Vs. The State of
Punjab & Another (RFA No. 2348/1998 decided on 28.01.2010).
4. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid decisions of the High
Court in the cases of Surjit Singh (supra) & Kapoor Singh (supra)
were the subject matter of appeals before this Court. In the case of
Kapoor Singh (supra) and other allied first appeals, this Court has
enhanced the amount of compensation by a further sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- and in the case of Surjit Singh (supra), the same has
been enhanced by a further sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre, payable by
the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority with interest and solatium
as prescribed by the Statute from the date of the orders passed by the
High Court (vide common order dated 15.01.2014 passed in Civil
Appeal Nos. 738-748/2014 - Kapoor Singh Vs. State of Punjab &
Another Etc. and Civil Appeal No. 363/2013 - Surjit Singh Vs.
State of Punjab & Anr. Etc.).
5. It is not in dispute that the landowners in the present appeals
are also similarly situated. As observed hereinabove, while determining
the compensation by the impugned common judgment and order/s, the
High Court has relied upon its earlier decisions in the cases of Surjit
Singh (supra) & Kapoor Singh (supra) respectively. Therefore, the
present appeals are also required to be disposed of in terms of the decision
of this Court in the cases of Surjit Singh (supra) & Kapoor Singh
(supra), by enhancing the amount of compensation by a further sum of
Rs.2,00,000/- per acre and Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre respectively. However,
there is a substantial delay in preferring the first appeals. Therefore, we
deem it appropriate to deny the statutory benefits including interest on
the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of the judgment/s
and order/s passed by the High Court till the present appeals (special
leave petitions) have been preferred before this Court.
HARPAL SINGH AND ANR. ETC. ETC. v. STATE OF PUNJAB
ETC. ETC. [M. R. SHAH, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
878
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 4 S.C.R.
6. In view of the above facts, all these appeals are partly allowed.
Accordingly, we enhance the amount of compensation payable to the
landowners by a further sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre in Civil Appeal
arising out of RFA No. 1614 of 2000 dated 28.01.2010. We enhance the
amount of compensation payable to the landowners by a further sum of
Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre in remaining Civil Appeals arising out of impugned
common judgment(s) and order(s) dated 01.05.2012/02.03.2009/
09.11.2009. It is also ordered that the original landowners shall be entitled
to solatium as prescribed under the statute on the enhanced amount of
compensation. It is also further ordered that the original landowners/
claimants shall not be entitled to any statutory benefits including the
interest under the Land Acquisition Act from the date of respective
judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court till the filing of the
appeals in this Court. The enhanced amount of compensation shall be
deposited by the Greater Mohali Area Development Authority within
three months from today before the Reference Court.
7. All these appeals are accordingly disposed of in the aforesaid
terms. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall
be no order as to costs.
Divya Pandey
Appeals disposed of.
(Assisted by : Deepak Panwar, LCRA)