RFA 1279 of 1991 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT,AT CHANDIGARH. RFA No. 1279 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 Surjit Kaur -- Appellant. vs. The State of Punjab -- Respondent. RFA No. 1275 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 Nachhatar Singh -- Appellant. vs. The State of Punjab -- Respondent. RFA No. 1000 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 Bara Singh -- Appellant. vs. The State of Punjab -- Respondent. RFA 1279 of 1991 2 RFA No. 1090 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 Baldev Singh -- Appellant. vs. The State of Punjab -- Respondent. AND RFA No. 1190 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 The State of Punjab -- Respondent. vs. Surjit Kaur -- Respondent. RFA No. 1191 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 The State of Punjab -- Respondent. vs. Nachhattar Singh -- Respondent. RFA No. 1192 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 The State of Punjab -- Respondent. vs. Baldev Singh -- Respondent. RFA 1279 of 1991 3 RFA No. 1193 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 The State of Punjab -- Respondent. vs. Bara Singh -- Respondent. RFA No. 1194 of 1991 Decided on May 26,2008 The State of Punjab -- Respondent. vs. Balwant Kaur -- Respondent. Present: Mr.Rajneesh Narula,Advocate,for the appellant (in RFA No.1279 of 1991only) Mr.P.C.Goyal,Senior D.A.G.Punjab,for the respondent(s). Rakesh Kumar Jain, J : This order shall dispose of RFA Nos. 1279, 1275,1000,1090 of 1991, filed by the claimants/land owners and RFA Nos. 1190,1191,1192,1193 and 1194 of 1991, filed by the State of Punjab, against the order of Additional District Judge, Ropar, dated January 02,1991, whereby the value of the acquired land has been assessed at a uniform rate of Rs. 90,000/-per acre. RFA 1279 of 1991 4 Vide notification dated September 03,1985, issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short,'the Act'), followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Act, dated September 11,1985, the land in village Dharak Kalan, belonging to the claimants/appellants was acquired for the construction of S.Y.L.Canal. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated March 21,1986, assessed the value of the acquired land @ Rs.62,000/- per acre for Chahi, Rs. 50,000/- per acre for Barani and Rs. 35,000/- per acre for Gair mumkin. Dis-satisfied with the award of the Collector, the claimants/land owners filed objections under Section 18 of the Act, which were referred to the Civil Court for adjudication. In the claim petitions, the claimants/appellants urged that the amount awarded by the Collector is inadequate. The potential value of the land in question has not been appreciated. The Collector should have awarded flat rate of the acquired land, irrespective of the quality of the land. In nutshell, the claimants pleaded that they be awarded compensation @ Rs, 1,50,000/- per acre. In the written statement filed by the State, the potentiality of the land was denied and it was urged that the land has been correctly treated as Barani as it was recorded as such in the jamabandi. It was also alleged that severance compensation had also been paid. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:- 1. Whether the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector is inadequate . If so, to what RFA 1279 of 1991 5 extent ? OPP 2. Whether the claimants are entitled to any enhancement of compensation. If so, to what effect ? OPP 3. Relief: Both the claimants as well as respondents led oral as well as documentary evidence in support of their respective claims. The claimants produced sale deeds Ex. P-1 to P-3. Besides the sale deeds, the claimants have also placed on record a certified copy of a judgment in the case of Dilbagh Singh v. State of Punjab pertaining to village Dharak Kalan, which is Ex. P-5, where in the compensation for the acquired land was assessed @ Rs.90,000/- per acre irrespective of quality of land. The respondents did not examine any witness and had only placed on record copies of sale deeds Ex. R-1 to R-3 and site plan Ex. R-4. The Court below has thoroughly examined the sale deeds relied upon by both the parties. It has been observed by it that the first sale deed relied upon by the claimants is dated January 28,1988 which pertains to sale of 1 kanal 4 marlas in village Chuni for Rs. 30,000/-, which comes to Rs. 2 lacs per acre. Second sale deed is dated March 07,1986 pertaining to sale of1 kanal 18 marlas of land also in village Chuni Kalan for Rs.40,000/- which comes to Rs. 1,65,000/- per acre and 3rd sale deed is dated March 11,1985 for sale of 4 kanals in Majat for Rs. 40,000/-, which comes to Rs. 80,000/- per acre. It was also opined by the Court below that sale deed Ex. P-1 is of a time much after the acquisition and RFA 1279 of 1991 6 pronouncement of the award, therefore, it cannot be made the basis, whereas other two sale deeds were not relied upon as they were of different villages which might have better location than the acquired land. So far sale deed Ex. R-1 is concerned, that was of June 08,1988, pertaining to 3 kanals 16 marlas of land in village Dharak Kalan for Rs. 14,250/- giving a rate of Rs.30,000/- per acre. Second sale deed Ex. R-2 is dated January 18,1988 pertaining to 5 kanals 13 marlas of land also in village Dharak Kalan for Rs. 20,000/- giving rate of Rs. 28,319/- per acre and 3rd sale deed Ex. R-3 is of February 13,1989 of sale of 16 kanals for Rs. 93,500/- giving rate of Rs.46,750/- per acre. All these three sale deeds were of village Dharak Kalan,but the rates were much lesser than the compensation awarded by the Collector. It was also found that all the three sale deeds relied upon by the State are of the land which is at a considerable distance from the acquired land. Thus, the Court below relied upon the best piece of evidence available on the record i.e. Ex P-5, which was the decision of the Court in the case of Dilbagh Singh v. Punjab State, referred to above, pertaining to village Dharak Kalan regarding the same acquisition and award, whereby Rs.90,000/- per acre has been awarded at a uniform rate for the acquired land. In R.F.A. No. 1279 of 1991 only Mr. Rajneesh Narula, Advocate, had appeared for the appellant, while in the other cases, no one had put in appearance on behalf of the appellants/claimants. Mr. Rajneesh Narula, has argued that the Court below should have relied upon the sale deeds produced by the claimants/land owners RFA 1279 of 1991 7 irrespective of the fact whether it was much beyond the period of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act as well as the award and should have awarded the compensation @ Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre as prayed for. On the other hand, Mr. P.C.Goyal, Senior Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the respondents in the appeal filed by the claimants/land owners and for the appellants in the appeal filed by the State of Punjab, has argued that award of Rs.90,000/- has been wrongly awarded by giving a uniform rate irrespective of the quality of land, therefore, the order of the Court below deserves to be set aside and the compensation awarded to the land-owners deserves to be reduced. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and have perused the record. Neither counsel for the appellants/claimants, nor the counsel for the respondents could have assailed the firm findings of the Court below recorded after appreciation of entire evidence whereby Rs.90,000/- per acre has been awarded as compensation on the basis of Ex. P-5, which is an earlier award of the Court pertaining to the same acquisition of the land of the same village. Thus, in my view, the compensation that has been awarded by the Court below has been rightly assessed and does not call for any further interference or modification either for the purposes of enhancement or for its reduction. RFA 1279 of 1991 8 Hence, the appeals filed by both the claimants as well as the State are merit-less and the same are hereby dismissed. No costs. May 26,2008 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge