RAM PHAL vs STATE OF HARYANA — C.A. No. 534/2013

Case under Section IV. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010165962011

Filing Date

18-May-2011

Registration No

C.A. No. 534/2013

Diary Number

16596/2011

Order Date

12-Jul-2023

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 05-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section IV

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RAM PHAL

    Adv. NIRMAL CHOPRA[P-1]

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF HARYANA

    Adv. MONIKA GUSAIN (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-1] MONIKA GUSAIN (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-2] MONIKA GUSAIN (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-3]

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 12-Jul-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 12-Jul-2023

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta

  4. 11-May-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  5. 11-May-2023

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant and Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala

  6. 17-Apr-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 22-Mar-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 22-Mar-2023

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant and Hon'ble Mr. Justice J.K. Maheshwari

  9. 20-Aug-2018

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 20-Aug-2018

    IA

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran

  11. 23-Jan-2018

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 23-Jan-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  13. 04-Dec-2014

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 14-Jan-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 07-May-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 23-Mar-2012

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 07-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 18-May-2011

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 534/2013

View Full Judgment
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: C.A. No. 534/2013 (Ram Phal v. State of Haryana) Outcome: The Supreme Court dismissed the appellants' appeal on July 12, 2023, affirming the High Court's compensation award of Rs.250/- per sq. yard for their acquired land in Patti Musalman village, Sonipat. The Court found no merit in the appellants' request for further enhancement and determined the High Court's 15% annual increase calculation (based on the earlier Udho Dass precedent for the same village) was fair and justified. Next Steps: All pending applications, including the impleadment application, were disposed of. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts District Courts
Search Another Case