R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [1] In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : September 05,2008 1. R. F. A. No. 2587 of 2004 M/s. Opera House Creations Pvt. Ltd. ..... Appellant vs State of Haryana and another .... Respondents 2. R. F. A. No. 2219 of 2004 Laxmi and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 3. R. F. A. No. 2416 of 2004 Dalip Singh ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 4. R. F. A. No. 2417 of 2004 Nafe Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 5. R. F. A. No. 2418 of 2004 Prabhu ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 6. R. F. A. No. 2419 of 2004 Om Parkash and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 7. R. F. A. No. 2425 of 2004 Sujan Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and another .... Respondents R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [2] 8. R. F. A. No. 2426 of 2004 Davinder Kumar and others .... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and another .... Respondents 9. R. F. A. No. 2427 of 2004 Bhagmal and another ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 10. R. F. A. No. 2428 of 2004 Kartar Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 11. R. F. A. No. 2429 of 2004 Mam Chand and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 12. R. F. A. No. 2430 of 2004 Khem Ram and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 13. R. F. A. No. 2431 of 2004 Ram Singh ..... Appellant vs State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 14. R. F. A. No. 2432 of 2004 Narain and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 15. R. F. A. No. 2483 of 2004 Narain and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [3] 16. R. F. A. No. 2484 of 2004 Smt. Anaro ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 17. R. F. A. No. 2485 of 2004 Matadin and another ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 18. R. F. A. No. 2486 of 2004 Sultan and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 19. R. F. A. No. 2502 of 2004 Rajesh Khurana ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 20. R. F. A. No. 2503 of 2004 Dior Import & Export (P) Ltd. ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 21. R. F. A. No. 2504 of 2004 Surender and another ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 22. R. F. A. No. 2505 of 2004 Kailash Rani ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 23. R. F. A. No. 2525 of 2004 Pardeep Kumar and another .... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [4] 24. R. F. A. No. 2561 of 2004 Amar Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and another .... Respondents 25. R. F. A. No. 2562 of 2004 Ram Dayal and others ..... Appellants vs Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 26. R. F. A. No. 2563 of 2004 Hans Ram and another ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and another .... Respondents 27. R. F. A. No. 2588 of 2004 M/s. Magnolia Blosam ..... Appellant vs State of Haryana and another .... Respondents 28. R. F. A. No. 2589 of 2004 M/s. Opera House Export Ltd. ..... Appellant vs State of Haryana and another .... Respondents 29. R. F. A. No. 2660 of 2004 Surat Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 30. R. F. A. No. 2683 of 2004 Ganpat and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 31. R. F. A. No. 2687 of 2004 Om Parkash and another ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [5] 32. R. F. A. No. 2688 of 2004 Rohtash (deceased) through LRs. and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 33. R. F. A. No. 91 of 2005 Prabhati and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 34. R. F. A. No. 92 of 2005 Ram Mehar ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 35. R. F. A. No. 93 of 2005 Hari Kishan ..... Appellant vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 36. R. F. A. No. 94 of 2005 Smt. Basanti Devi and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 37. R. F. A. No. 164 of 2005 Hari Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and another .... Respondents 38. R. F. A. No. 268 of 2005 Hari Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 39. R. F. A. No. 269 of 2005 Shiv Lal and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [6] 40. R. F. A. No. 270 of 2005 Ram Mehar and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 41. R. F. A. No. 271 of 2005 Siri Bhagwan and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and another .... Respondents 42. R. F. A. No. 272 of 2005 Mange Ram and another ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 43. R. F. A. No. 343 of 2005 Shri Krishan @ Shri Kishan and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 44. R. F. A. No. 344 of 2005 Shri Ram and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 45. R. F. A. No. 512 of 2005 Bal Ram and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 46. R. F. A. No. 546 of 2005 Ved Parkash and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [7] 47. R. F. A. No. 577 of 2005 Jai Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 48. R. F. A. No. 578 of 2005 Jai Narain and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 49. R. F. A. No. 579 of 2005 Satish Kumar Yadav and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 50. R. F. A. No. 857 of 2005 Balbir Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 51. R. F. A. No. 858 of 2005 Jai Lal and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 52. R. F. A. No. 859 of 2005 Udme ..... Appellant vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 53. R. F. A. No. 860 of 2005 Jit Ram and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 54. R. F. A. No. 861 of 2005 Nawal Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [8] 55. R. F. A. No. 862 of 2005 Giani and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 56. R. F. A. No. 863 of 2005 Bhoop Singh and another ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 57. R. F. A. No. 864 of 2005 Rampal and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 58. R. F. A. No. 1290 of 2005 Udami and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 59. R. F. A. No. 1291 of 2005 Dharam Pal and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 60. R. F. A. No. 1292 of 2005 Satish Kumar Yadav ..... Appellant vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 61. R. F. A. No. 1442 of 2005 Giani ..... Appellant vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [9] 62. R. F. A. No. 1443 of 2005 Jagat Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 63. R. F. A. No. 1938 of 2005 Mangat and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 64. R. F. A. No. 1939 of 2005 Mool Chand and others ..... Appellants vs The Land Acquisition Collector-cum- S. D. O. (Civil), Gurgaon and others .... Respondents 65. R. F. A. No. 2895 of 2005 Mawasi and another ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 66. R. F. A. No. 2831 of 2006 Raghbir and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents 67. R. F. A. No. 4143 of 2006 Mohinder Singh and others ..... Appellants vs The State of Haryana and others .... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Shailendra Jain, Advocate for the appellants in R.F.A. Nos. 2219, 2502, 2503, 2504, 2505, 2525, 2587, 2588, 2589, 2660, 2687 and 2688 of 2004 and 512 of 2005. Mr. G.K. Chawla, Advocate for the appellants in R.F.A. Nos. 2561, 2562 and 2563 of 2004, 164, 343 and 344 of 2005. R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [10] Mr. Jaivir Yadav, Advocate for the appellants in R.F.A. Nos. 2416, 2417, 2418, 2419, 2425, 2426, 2427, 2428, 2429, 2430, 2431, 2432, 2483, 2484, 2485, 2486 of 2004 and 2895 of 2005. Mr. R.A. Yadav, Advocate for the appellants in R.F.A. Nos. 91, 92, 93, 94, 268, 269,270,271, 272, 577, 578, 579 of 2005 and 2831 and 4143 of 2006. Mr. H.S. Hooda, Advocate General, Haryana with Mr. Rajiv Kawatra, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. Ashok Jindal, Advocate for respondent No.3 . ... Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of the above mentioned R.F.A. No 2587, 2219, 2416, 2417, 2418, 2419, 2425, 2426, 2427, 2428, 2429, 2430, 2431, 2432, 2483, 2484, 2485, 2486, 2502, 2503, 2504, 2505, 2525, 2561, 2562, 2563, 2588, 2589, 2660, 2683, 2687, 2688, of 2004, 91, 92, 93, 94, 164, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 343, 344, 512, 546, 577, 578, 579, 857, 858, 859, 860, 861, 862, 863, 864, 1290, 1291, 1292, 1442, 1443, 1938, 1939 and 2895 of 2005 and 2831 and 4143 of 2006 as the same arise out of the common award of the learned Court below. However, the facts have been extracted from R.F.A. No.2587 of 2004. The land owners are in appeal before this Court against the award of the learned Court below passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that land measuring 256 acres 3 kanals and 17 marlas in Village Manesar was acquired for setting up of Industrial Model Township, Manesar vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Act on 30.4.1994 which was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act on 30.3.1995. The award was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') on 28.3.1997 determining the value of the land at Rs. 3,67,400/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections which were referred for consideration by the learned Court below. Considering the material facts placed on record by the parties, the learned Court below awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [11] 6,51,994.13 per acre for `A' class land, i.e., situated around 500 yards from the National Highway No.8 and Rs. 3,91,196.97 per acre for `B' class land situated in the interior. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the parties that no independent evidence as such was led in the present case and reliance was merely on the award of the Reference Court in case of land acquired in the same village vide notification dated 15.11.1994. The submission is that keeping in view gap in the two notifications a reasonable cut @ 12% be applied and value of land be assessed accordingly. It is further submitted that in the peculiar facts of the case, value of the land can be assessed on the basis of value determined for subsequent notification. In R.F.A. No. 2699 of 2003 –Pran Sukh and others v. The State of Haryana and others, decided on 19.5.2006, this Court, while considering the acquisition of land measuring 1490 acres 3 kanals and 17 marlas in Villages Manesar, Naharpur Kasan, Khoh and Kasan vide notification dated 15.11.1994, determined the value of the land at Rs. 15,00,000/- per acre without any categorisation. In the reference by the land owners before the Court below, they had relied upon the award of the Reference Court regarding the acquisition made in the same village vide notification dated 15.11.1994. Prior thereto, land reference before the Court below, which is subject matter of R.F.A. No. 2525 of 2004-- Pardeep Kumar and another v. State of Haryana and others, the State itself had relied upon the earlier award given by the Reference Court with regard to the acquisition made in the same village vide notification dated 15.11.1994. This necessarily meant that the State is not disputing the quality, location and potentiality of the land involved in the present case with reference to the land acquired vide notification dated 15.11.1994. In view of these facts on record, now the question for determination by this Court is as to what was the value of the land under acquisition in the present set of appeals on the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. It is an admitted fact that first acquisition for development of Industrial Model Township at Manesar was started with the acquisition of land vide notification dated 30.4.1994. This R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [12] acquisition was for Phase-I thereof. For development of Phase-II of Industrial Model Township, Manesar, the land was acquired vide notification dated 15.11.1994. Thereafter, subsequently for Phases-III, IV and V, the acquisitions were made in the years 2002, 2003 and 2004 respectively. Once the acquisition process for setting up of an Industrial Model Township at Manesar was started with the acquisition of land vide notification dated 30.4.1994, certainly the people in the area will become more interested in that area. The value of the property in the vicinity will certainly shoot up with the proposed planned development of the area. It is not disputed that there is no independent evidence on record in the present case showing the transactions of sale or purchase of land in the area. The only reference is to the award of the learned Court below with regard to the acquisition of land vide notification dated 15.11.1994 pertaining to the acquisition of land for Phase-II of Industrial Model Township, Manesar. The amount of compensation for acquisition of land vide notification dated 15.11.1994 was further enhanced by this Court in Pran Sukh's case (supra) to Rs. 15,00,000/- per acre. It has come on record in that case that the transaction which has been primarily relied upon by this Court for determining the value of the land is Ex.P.1. It has further come on record in that case that even the agreement for the aforesaid land was entered into on 31.5.1994, i.e., after the acquisition of land in dispute in the present set of appeals, meaning thereby that the effect of the notification had come into existence as the people knew that the land in the vicinity is being acquired for the planned development of the area and therefore, in my opinion, the argument of the learned counsel for the appellants that reasonable cut @ 12% per annum be applied and compensation be assessed is totally misconceived. As against this, in my opinion, keeping in view the fact that before the reference Court even the State had relied upon the award given for the acquisition of land in the same village vide notification dated 15.11.1994, it would be reasonable if a cut of 20% is applied out of the value of the land determined for acquisition made vide notification dated 15.11.1994 for the same village and for the same purpose. Accordingly, while reducing a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre out of Rs. 15,00,000/- per acre granted as compensation for the land R.F.A. No. 2587 of 2004 [13] acquired vide notification dated 15.11.1994, the appellants would be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre. They shall also be entitled to all other statutory benefits available to them under the Act. The appeals are allowed with costs. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge September 05 ,2008 mk