R.F.A. No. 2474 of 1991 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: 17.11.2008
(1) R.F.A. No. 2474 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Daya Ram and others .. Respondents
(2) R.F.A. No. 2475 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Kacheru and others .. Respondents
(3) R.F.A. No. 2476 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Bhagmal and others .. Respondents
(4) R.F.A. No. 2477 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Ram Chand .. Respondent
(5) R.F.A. No. 2478 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Dungar (deceased) through LRs .. Respondents
(6) R.F.A. No. 2479 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Ram Kishan and others .. Respondents
(7) R.F.A. No. 2480 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Khacheru and others .. Respondents
R.F.A. No. 2474 of 1991 [2]
(8) R.F.A. No. 2481 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Partap and others .. Respondents
(9) R.F.A. No. 2482 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Dharam Pal and others .. Respondents
(10) R.F.A. No. 2483 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Richhpal (deceased) through LRs and others .. Respondents
(11) R.F.A. No. 2484 of 1991
Haryana State
.. Appellant
v.
Chet Ram and others .. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Additional Advocate General, Haryana
for the State.
Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the respondents.
Rajesh Bindal J.
This order will dispose of a bunch of 11 appeals, as the same arise
out of a common acquisition.
The State is in appeal against the award of the learned court below
seeking reduction of the amount of compensation awarded to the land owners.
The facts have been noticed from R.F.A. No. 2474 of 1991.
Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 22.1.1985, issued
under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act’), State of
Haryana acquired land measuring 7.86 acres, situated in the revenue estate of
village Bhondsi, for construction of road from Rithoj to Dhumaspur via Naya
Gaon. The same was followed by notification dated 3.1.1986, issued under Section
6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector’) vide his
R.F.A. No. 2474 of 1991 [3]
award dated 5.2.1987, determined the market value of land at Rs. 25,120/- per
acre for chahi land; Rs. 15,040/- per acre for Bhood land; Rs. 10,080/- per acre for
Namjar land and Rs. 6,080/- per acre for gair mumkin kind of land. However, the
Additional District Judge, on reference under Section 18 of the Act, determined
the market value at Rs. 50,000/- per acre for chahi land; Rs. 30,000/- per acre for
Bhood land; Rs. 20,000/- per acre for Banjar land and Rs. 12,000/- per acre for
Gair Mumkin land.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that the learned court below
has not considered the evidence led by it on record for the purpose of
determination of fair value of the acquired land and has merely relied upon its
earlier award, though the same was pertaining to the same acquisition. Once
independent evidence was led in the present case, the court should have considered
the same and arrived at its independent conclusion.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the land owners submitted
that the learned court below has not committed any illegality in relying upon its
earlier award pertaining to the same acquisition. Once it has not been disputed that
as to whether any appeal was filed against award (Ex. P1), relied upon by the
learned court below and the status thereof, the award in the present case cannot be
interfered with as all the land owners, whose land was acquired vide same
notification, should be paid the same amount of compensation.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
It is evident from a perusal of the impugned award that all what had
been relied upon by the learned court below was its earlier award (Ex. P1) passed
in LAC No. 56 of 1990, decided on 5.12.1990, which was pertaining to the
acquisition by the same notification and for the same purpose. The fact as to
whether award (Ex. P1) was accepted by the State or any appeal was filed against
the same has not been pointed out. While considering the evidence produced on
record by the parties, the learned court below in award (Ex. P1) had assessed the
fair value of the acquired land at Rs. 50,000/- per acre for chahi land; Rs. 30,000/-
per acre for Bhood land; Rs. 20,000/- per acre for Banjar land and Rs. 12,000/- per
acre for Gair Mumkin land. Once the reliance by the learned court below is on the
earlier award pertaining to the same acquisition and the same having been accepted
by the State, I do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned award as well.
Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed.
(Rajesh Bindal)
Judge
17.11.2008
mk