R.F.A. No. 2122 of 1995 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: 8.12.2008
(1) R.F.A. No. 2122 of 1995
and Cross Objection No. 59-CI of 2000
The State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Gurnam Singh
.. Respondent
(2) R.F.A. No. 2123 of 1995
and Cross Objections No.58-CI of 2000
The State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Waryam Singh
.. Respondent
(3) R.F.A. No. 1204 of 1998
Jasbir Singh
.. Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and another
.. Respondents
(4) R.F.A. No. 1508 of 1998
Sukhdev Singh
.. Appellant
v.
State of Punjab and another
.. Respondents
(5) R.F.A. No. 2125 of 1998
Buta Singh and others
.. Appellants
v.
State of Punjab
.. Respondent
R.F.A. No. 2122 of 1995 [2]
(6) R.F.A. No. 2360 of 1999
State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Harbans Singh and others
.. Respondents
(7) R.F.A. No. 2361 of 1999
State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Bachna Ram and another
.. Respondents
(8) R.F.A. No. 2362 of 1999
State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Sukhdev Singh
.. Respondent
(9) R.F.A. No. 2363 of 1999
State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Ram Prakash and others
.. Respondents
(10) R.F.A. No. 2364 of 1999
State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Jasvir Singh
.. Respondent
(11) R.F.A. No. 2365 of 1999
State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Mohinder Singh and others
.. Respondents
R.F.A. No. 2122 of 1995 [3]
(12) R.F.A. No. 2366 of 1999
State of Punjab
.. Appellant
v.
Smt. Parsadi (deceased) through LRs
and others
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. O. P. Dabla, Additional Advocate General, Punjab
for the State.
Mr. Arun Bansal, Mr. Vishal Gupta, Mr. P.S. Saini and
Mr. M. L. Sharma, Advocates for the land owners.
Rajesh Bindal J.
This order will dispose of a bunch of 12 cases, as the same arise out
of a common acquisition.
R.F.A. Nos. 2122, 2123 of 1995 and 2360 to 2366 of 1999 have
been filed by the State seeking reduction of compensation awarded by the learned
court below to the land owners.
R.F.A. Nos. 1204, 1508 and 2125 of 1998 have been filed by the
land owners seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land.
In R.F.A. Nos. 2122 and 2123 of 1995, the land owners have also
filed cross-objections praying for further enhancement of compensation.
The facts have been noticed from R.F.A. No. 2122 of 1995.
Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 16.11.1988, issued
under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act’), State of
Punjab acquired the land in question situated in Village Shekhpur Khurd, Tehsil
Rajpura, District Patiala for construction of Bassi Distributory. The same was
followed by notification dated 5.12.1988 issued under Section 6 of the Act. The
Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector’) vide his award dated
6.3.1991, determined the market value of land at Rs. 60,000/- per acre for chahi
land and Rs. 45,000/- for barani land. However, learned Additional District
Judge, Patiala, on reference under Section 18 of the Act, vide his award dated
16.5.1995 determined the market value of chahi land at Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre; Rs.
85,800/- per acre for Barani land and Rs. 71,500/- per acre for Gair Mumkin kind
of land.
Learned counsel for the land owners submitted that the sale deeds
produced by them on record (Ex. A1 to Ex. A3) had not been considered by the
learned court below at all while assessing the fair value of the land. Reliance was
R.F.A. No. 2122 of 1995 [4]
placed merely on an earlier award of the Reference Court pertaining to the
acquisition of land for Village Devi Nagar. The submission is that as per sale deed
(Ex. A1), 1 bigha of land was sold for a consideration of Rs. 48,000/-. Vide sale
deed (Ex. A2), 1 bigha and 2 biswas of land was sold for Rs. 48,000/- and vide
sale deed (Ex. A3), 1 bigha of land was also sold for Rs. 48,000/-. However, the
fact that the land pertaining to village Devi Nagar is situated close to Villages
Shekhpur Khurd and Bakarpur is not denied. Learned counsel further submitted
that the learned court below has not granted any compensation to the land owners
in the present case on account of division of land and for other losses suffered by
them on account of acquisition. Reliance was also placed upon a judgment of this
Court in Lal Chand (Died) Thru. LRs v. State of Punjab and another, 2005(2)
LACC 228, wherein for acquisition of land vide notification dated 28.8.1985 of
village Khera Gajju, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, the value was determined at
Rs. 1,32,000/- per acre for Chahi land and Rs. 79,200/- per acre for Gair Mumkin
land.
In R.F.A. No. 2125 of 1998, learned counsel for the land owners
submitted that though acquisition in the present case was also vide same
notification pertaining to the land forming part of revenue estate of Village
Bakarpur, but still the learned court below did not grant same compensation to the
land owners therein as was granted to other land owners whose land was acquired
vide same notification. The prayer is for grant of same compensation to the land
owners in the present appeal.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that in the
absence of any independent evidence on record, which could be considered by this
court for determination of fair value of the acquired land, the land owners in the
present case have already been granted much more than what they deserved. The
sale deeds produced by the land owners could not be considered for the simple
reason that location thereof has not been pointed out on any of the site plans on
record to judge the comparative value thereof vis-a-vis the acquired land.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
None of the counsel for the land owners has pointed out whether
award of the learned Reference Court pertaining to village Devi Nagar, which was
relied upon by the learned court below was further appealed against and the
compensation was further enhanced or reduced. Further, it has also not been
pointed out as to whether any other appeal arising out of the same acquisition is
either pending or has been decided by this Court.
A perusal of the impugned award shows that the land owners in the
R.F.A. No. 2122 of 1995 [5]
present case produced three sale deeds (Ex. A1 to Ex. A3) dated 2.6.1988,
9.6.1988 and 9.6.1988, respectively and further relied upon the award pertaining
to acquisition of land of village Devi Nagar for the same purpose vide notification
dated 21.11.1988. As far as sale deeds are concerned, the same cannot be
considered at all for the simple reason that location of the land dealt with therein
has not been shown on any of the site plans produced on record. In the absence
thereof, it would be totally misplaced to rely thereon for the purpose of
determination of fair value in the present case.
As far as reliance on the award of the learned court below pertaining
to the acquisition of land for the same purpose of Village Devi Nagar is concerned,
in the absence of any material on record to suggest that the award relied upon was
further appealed against and the compensation was enhanced, I do not find any
reason to enhance the compensation awarded to the land owners in the present set
of appeals. The Court below had relied upon the award pertaining to the acuisition
of land of village Devi Nagar considering the fact that the land pertaining to
villages Shekhpur Khurd and Bakarpur are located adjoining to the land of Village
Devi Nagar and the value and potential of land of these villages was same.
In the light of above facts, I do not find any reason to interfere with
the impugned award. Accordingly, all the appeals except R.F.A. No. 2125 of 1998
and the cross-objections are dismissed.
As far as R.F.A. No. 2125 of 1998 is concerned, a perusal of the
impugned award shows that though the acquisition being dealt with by the learned
court below in the present case was pertaining to the land of village Bakarpur vide
same notification, but the earlier award of the Reference Court pertaining to the
same acquisition was not relied upon and the award of the Collector was upheld.
When all the land owners, whose land was acquired for the same purpose by the
same notification, have been granted compensation at the rate of Rs. 85,800/- per
acre, there is no reason to discriminate the appellants in the above appeal.
Accordingly, the amount of compensation payable to the land owners in the
present appeal is also assessed at Rs. 85,800/- per acre. The land owners shall also
be entitled to the statutory benefits as available under the Act.
As far as claim of the land owners regarding grant of severance and
other damages is concerned, this Court will not opine thereon for the simple reason
that it is mentioned in the impugned award that stand of the State was that
compensation on account of division of land and for other losses was to be paid
through supplementary award. The progress in that regard is not on record.
Accordingly, R.F.A. No. 2125 of 1998 is allowed and compensation
R.F.A. No. 2122 of 1995 [6]
payable for acquisition of land is enhanced to Rs. 85,800/- per acre from Rs.
60,000/- per acre with all other statutory benefits, whereas all other appeals and
cross objections are dismissed.
(Rajesh Bindal)
Judge
8.12.2008
mk