JUDGMENT
Jai Singh Sekhon, J.
1. This appeal as well as Regular First Appeals Nos. 449, 807, 808, 810, 811, 812, 1062, 1063, 1065 to 1068, 1190 and 1621 of 1985 and 103 of 1986 preferred by different land owners besides R.F.A. Nos. 1119 to 1135 of 1985 filed by the State of Haryana against the award dt. 22-2-1985 of Shri V. M. Jain, Additional District Judge, Ambala, shall be disposed of by this order as they relate to the same kind of land which was acquired vide the same notification. R.F.A. Nos. 1964, 1965 and 1966 of 1986 filed by the land owners besides R.F.A. Nos. 2035 to 2037 of 1986 preferred by the State, arise out of the award dt. 9-5-1986 passed by Shri M. C. Aggarwal. Additional District Judge, Ambala, shall also be disposed of by this order as these also relate to the same kind of land acquired vide the same notification.
2. In pursuance of notification published on 23-8-1974 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) land measuring 9840 acres located in various Bhojas i.e. revenue estates of the Morni Hills of Tehsil Naraingarh District Ambala, was acquired by the State of Haryana at public expense for public purpose namely ‘Forest plantation and other anti soil erosion measures’. Notification under Section 6 of the Act followed on 22-4-1977. The Land Acquisition Collector, vide different awards relating to different Bhojas, given on 23-1-1979 awarded compensation of the acquired land at Rs. 35/-per acre besides allowing 15% solatium over and above the said compensation. No interest
on the compensation was allowed as the possession of the land was not yet taken over by the State. Being not satisfied with the adequacy of the compensation awarded by the Collector, different land holders including the present appellant sought references under Section 18 of the Act to the Court of learned District Judge, Ambala, claiming that they were at least entitled to Rs. 5,000/- per acre as compensation of their acquired land. Shri V. M. Jain, learned Additional District Judge, Ambala vide his award dt. 22-2-1985 enhanced the compensation of the acquired land to Rs. 350/- per acre, besides allowing 15% solatium and interest at the rate of 6% per annum over the enhanced compensation from the date of taking possession of the acquired land. Shri M. C. Aggarwal, Additional District Judge, Ambala, vide his award dated 9-5-1986 awarded similar amount of compensation by placing reliance on the above referred award of Shri V. M. Jain.
3. 1 have heard the learned counsel for the parties besides perusing the record.
4. Shri V. M. Jain, Additional District Judge, Ambala, has mainly based his award on the judgment of this Court in R.F.A. No. 805 of 1973 whereby the compensation of the acquired land of seven different Bhojas comprising Morni hills, acquired on 1-2-1968 was awarded at the rate of Rs. 290/- per acre by taking into consideration the potentiality of the land for wild growth of trees and grass. The learned Additional District Judge, Ambala, increased the compensation of the acquired land to Rs. 350/- per acre, by taking into consideration that the present land was acquired about six years after the acquisition of the and subject matter of R.F.A. No. 805 of 19(sic). The sale transactions Exhibits Rule 6 to Rule 1) relied upon by the State were discarded by the learned Additional District Judge, on the ground that these sales of the portion of the acquired land had taken place on 24-1-1977 when Shri Mir Mohd. Kasim Ali Khan, the original owner of a part of this land residing at Aligarh (U.P.) lost patience of getting any compensation of the acquired land, while the sale transactions Exhibits Rule 1
to Rule 5 were discarded as these related to the years 1967 and 1968.
5. The law is well settled on the point that the compensation of the acquired land has to be assessed on the basis of its prevalent market value on the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act i.e. 23-8-1974 in the present case under the provisions of Section 23 of the Act. It is further settled that for arriving at the market value of the acquired land, the value of the forest trees or orchard growing thereon had to be taken into consideration. The decisions of the Supreme Court in Niranjan Singh v. State of U.P., AIR 1979 SC 1547 as well as in Chaturbhuj Pande v. Collector, Raigarh, AIR 1969 SC 255 can be safely referred to in this regard. In the case in hand, the acquired land forms part of the Morni hills which is admittedly semi hilly area where there is a wild growth of trees of different varieties like Khair, Cheer, Jhingan, Raini, Papri, Chhal etc. as deposed by PW 15 Shri R. C. Trigotra, Divisional Forest Officer. The testimony of P.W. 7 Mulkh Raj Patwari Bhoj Rajpur also shows that the land of all these Bhoj as was of hilly area and of similar quality. During cross-examination, he admitted that this land was not fit for cultivation. He also stated that the land belonging to Mir Mohd. Kasim Ali was unmeasured. P.W. 15 Mr. Trigotra further stated that the forest on the acquired land remained on lease with the forest Department from the year 1945 to 1979 and it was declared protected area under the provisions of Punjab Land Preservation Act, 1900. He also conceded that the land owners used to cut trees on the said land with the permission of the Forest Department. He also tendered into evidence list Exhibit P.W. 15/1 depicts the issuing of permits by Forest Deptt. to different contractors or the land owners. He also made a damaging admission to the case of the land owners by stating that almost all the trees growing on this land were removed by the land owners before its acquisition except the trees meant for seeds etc. He further stated that on average there were 15 to 20 trees per acre, in all growing on the acquired land at the time of acquisition but qualified his statement that these trees were not meant for
felling as the same were for the purpose of seeds and soil conservation. During cross-examination he stated that whatever land was fit for cultivation was excluded from acquisition but the remaining uneven hilly and stonny land subject to water erosion was acquired. No doubt this witness was not permitted to be cross-examined by the land holders but all the same there being no documentary or reliable evidence on the files to contradict the version of this witness, it is of no consequence. Thus from the evidence of this forest Officer, it transpired that at least 15 trees per acre were growing on the acquired land at the time of its acquisition. P.W. 12 Teja Ram, Deputy Forest Ranger, who remained employed in this Forest Range till 1979 also stated that the value of Khair tree varied from Rs. 40 to 45 per tree while that of Cheer tree was about Rs. 50/- each tree. In cross-examination, he admitted that only standard trees meant for seeds etc. were growing on the acquired land at the time of acquisition and that the acquired land being a hilly area was not fit for cultivation. Strange enough the State had not examined any official of the Forest Department in order to rebut the evidence of these two official witnesses. Under these circumstances, there is no option but to hold that at least 15 trees per acre were present on the acquired land at the time of its acquisition and their value as fuel wood cannot be assessed lesser than Rs. 40/- per tree especially when these trees must be of considerable growth being kept for seed purposes. In a way it can be well said that the value of the fuel wood trees growing in every acre of the a acquired land was Rs. 600/- at the time of its acquisition. A perusal of the statements Ex. P.W. 15/2 and P.W. 15/3 reveals that Babbar grass, major and minor forest produce growing on this land used to be auctioned by the Forest Department annually and the proceeds there from were distributed amongst the land owners after deducting the administrative charges. The average per acre income from the sale of Babbar grass appears to be minimal as it was auctioned at the rate of 5 paise to 67 paise per acre. But the statement Exhibit P.W. 15/3 does not provide any date for
assessing the annual income from the sale of Resin blaze etc. and being a combined statement of different Bhojas. Anyhow one has to depend upon some guess working for assessing such income from the trees grown on the acquired land. Thus, it can be well said that the market value of the acquired land has to be assessed by taking into consideration that trees of at least Rs. 600/-per acre value were growing on the acquired land at the time of acquisition.
6. In R.F.A. No. 805of 1973 Brother I. S. Tiwana, J. had not awarded any compensation for the standing trees due to lack of any reliable evidence but had indirectly taken into consideration the potential of this hilly area or growth of wild jungle trees. Under these circumstances the ratio of the above referred case partaining to the land acquired on 1-2-1968 is not of much relevance for assessing the market value of the acquired land.
7. The award Exhibit PW 10/D of the Land Acquisition Collector pertaining to the acquisition of 47 bighas and 7 biswas of different kind of land, awarding compensation at the rate of Rs. 3480/- for Abi Awal, and Rs. 2400/- for Banjar Jadid, while Rs. 480/-for the land under Jungle, per acre, is also of not much relevance as it relates to the land of village Bhoj Mataur located on the Panchkula-Morni metalled road. There being no other evidence to prove that the jungle land in that award was also a part of the hilly area, it cannot be said to be of the same quality as the acquired (land). The sale deeds Exhibits PW 3/1 and PW 5/1 also relate to the land purchased by Moti Singh (PW 3) and Amar Singh (PW 5) respectively for cultivation and construction of house respectively. So these sale transactions also cannot provide any sound basis for assessing the market value of the acquired land. The sale deed Exhibit P1 pertains to 3 Bigha and 5 Biswas of land only and thus it cannot be of much help in assessing the market value of the acquired land. Similarly the sale deeds Exhibits PW 4/1 and PW 13/1 are not of much value as the land subject matter of those sale deeds was under cultivation as admitted by Banarsi Dass (PW 4)
and Phool Chand (PW 13). The award of the Collector Exhibit A/1 pertaining to 11 Bighas and 3 Biswas of land acquired for the residential purposes of the Forest Rangers from the area of village Bhoj Dhatti is also not of much consequence as that land was also fit for cultivation. Similarly award Exhibit PW 8/1 pertaining to 5 Bighas 10 Biswas of land acquired for the purposes of water supply to village Morni is not of much relevance as the said land was located near habitation of village Morni itself.
8. There is no force in the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the State of Haryana that the sale transactions Exhibits R6 to R41 pertaining to a part of the acquired land were wrongly discarded by the Additional District Judge, because that land was sold by Mir Mohd. Kasim AH Khan (PW 9 in those cases) was unmeasured and its area had to be assessed on the basis of the previous survey conducted by the officials of the Survey of India and despite best efforts of said Mir Mohd. Kasim Ali Khan, no fresh survey could be got conducted for the measurement of his acquired land although he had successfully obtained an order of the High Court in this regard. Thus, it appears to be a case of sale of land at a throw away price after its acquisition when its owner felt frustrated and had no hope of getting any compensation of his acquired land. Moreover, a perusal of the judgment of this Court in R.F.A. No. 805 of 1973 reveals that a dispute about the ownership of this land continued between Mir Mohd. Kasim Ali Khan and other claimants. Similar view was taken by this Court in the above referred appeal while ignoring these sales.
9. The question then arises as to what criteria should be used for assessing the market value of the acquired hilly area itself. In this regard there is no other reliable evidence except that the (sic) Additional District Judges as well as brother Tiwana J. in R.F.A. No. 805 of 1973 had assessed the compensation of the acquired land by taking into consideration, its potential for the growth of wild trees though the actual market value of the trees growing on this land at the time
of its acquisition was not considered. Keeping in view that there would be no question of growth of wild trees on the non-existing land, it transpires that some compensation had to be awarded for the acquired land itself, although the market value of the acquired land shall be the sum total of market value of the existing trees and future potential of the land for the growth of such trees. The only precedent cited in this regard is Ram Singh v. Punjab State now Haryana State 1976 Revenue Law Reporter 41 which pertains to the acquisition of semi hilly area under jungle land of village Khuda Ali Sher and Kansal located near Sukhna Lake, Chandigarh where compensation of the Ghair Mumkin land under forest was assessed at Rs. 500/- per acre besides compensation of Rs. 300/-per acre for the growing trees. From the description of the land as Ghair Mumkin in the above referred judgment, the possibility of the land being of better quality than the quality of the acquired land cannot be ruled out. The land of village Kansal and Khuda Ali Sher being located just near Chandigarh, certainly had better potential than the acquired land. Thus, it cannot provide genuine basis for assessing the market value of the acquired land. Therefore, it transpires that the market value of the acquired land has to be assessed by taking into consideration the value of the trees and grass etc. actually growing on this land at the time of its acquisition besides the market value of the land itself, by keeping in view its propensity for the growth of wild trees and grass etc. It appears that the learned Additional District Judges, by relying upon the decision of I. S. Tiwana J. in R.F.A. No. 805 of 1973, have assessed the market value and awarded compensation of the acquired land by taking into consideration the future prosperity of the land for the growth of wild trees and arass etc. Consequently, the market value o’ the acquired land, at the time of acquisition would be composite one i.e. it will include the value of Rs. 600/- per acre for the trees and grass growing thereon besides Rs. 350/-per acre being the value of the land itself. Under these circumstances, the market value of the acquired land on the date of acquisition is assessed at Rs. 950/- per acre.
10. In R.F.A. Nos. 1964, 1965, 1966, 2035, 2036 and 2037 of 1986 arising out of the award of Shri M. C. Aggarwal, Additional District Judge, it is contended by the learned counsel for the State of Haryana, that compensation for the acquired land cannot be enhanced as the above referred evidence was not produced by the petitioners in those references before the learned Additional District Judge. There is no dispute that the petitioners in those references only tendered certified copy of the award of Shri V. M. Jain, Additional District Judge, Ambala, dt. 22-2-1985 but all the same keeping in view the doctrine of stare decisis and the amended provisions of the Act, providing for those land owners who have not even filed references under Section 18 of the Act, to claim enhanced compensation from the Land Acquisition Collector, on the basis of such enhancement on the references of other land owners, it transpires that no different yard stick can be adopted in assessing the compensation of the similarly situated acquired land in these appeals also.
11. For the foregoing reasons, the compensation of the acquired land is enhanced to Rs. 950/- per acre by accepting this appeal as well as the other appeals filed by the land owners but rejecting the appeals filed by the State of Haryana. The appellants shall also be entitled to 30% solatium over and above the said compensation in view of the amended provisions of the Act. They shall also be entitled to an amount equal to 12% per annum over and above the market value from the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier, under Section 23(1A) of the Act. Besides this, they shall also be entitled to 9% per annum interest on the compensation of the acquired land for the first year of taking possession of the land and 15% per annum onwards till its payment. The appellants shall also be entitled to proportionate costs of these appeals. If need be, the appellants shall make good the deficiency in the Court-fee within a period of two months from today. The security or indemnity bonds furnished by different
claimants while getting their compensation from the trial Court as per orders of this Court are ordered to be discharged.