RFA No. 652 of 1993 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 19.3.2010 1) RFA No. 652 of 1993 (O&M) Dev Singh alias Gurdev Singh and others ....Appellants Versus Land Acquisition Collector and another ...Respondents 2) RFA No. 941 of 1993 (O&M) State of Punjab ....Appellant Versus Sajjan Singh and others ...Respondents 3) RFA No. 1049 of 1993 (O&M) State of Punjab ....Appellant Versus Phuman Singh (deceased) through LRs and another ...Respondents CORAM : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. V.K. Kataria, Advocate for the land owners. Mr. Navdeep Sukhna, AAG Punjab. RAJESH BINDAL, J **** This order shall dispose of the above mentioned three appeals, as the same arise out of a common acquisition. R.F.A. Nos. 941 and 1049 of 1993 have been filed by the State of Punjab seeking reduction in the amount of compensation awarded to the land owners for the acquired land. R.F.A. No. 652 of 1993 has been filed by the land owners seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. The facts have been extracted from R.F.A. No. 652 of 1993. Briefly, the facts are that the State of Punjab vide notification dated 24.4.1984 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (for short, “the Act”,) acquired the land measuring 6.13 acres situated in the area of village RFA No. 652 of 1993 2 Hari Nau, Hadbast No. 105, Tehsil and District Faridkot, for construction of Sarawan drain from RD 0 to RD 49000. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') awarded the market value of the land at Rs. 25,000/- per acre. The land owners feeling dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Collector, filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned Court below determined the market value of the acquired land by granting compensation @ Rs. 30,000/- per acre. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the learned Court below has failed to consider the sale deed Ex.P1 produced on record by them which pertained to the same village and was for the land measuring 5 kanals 16 marlas which was registered on March 29, 1984 prior to the date of notification. Total consideration paid therein was Rs. 58,000/- and the vendee was District Welfare Officer, Faridkot. The genuineness of the aforesaid sale deed cannot be doubted and the same being of the village, the land of which was acquired, should have been considered by the Court for the purpose of determination of compensation. However, on a query by the Court as to in which site plan the land pertaining to the aforesaid sale deed has been shown, learned counsel for the land owners was fair enough to state that it has not been located on any of the site plan. On the other hand learned counsel for the State submitted that there was no evidence on record produced by the land owners on the basis of which the value of the acquired land could be enhanced from Rs. 25,000/- per acre to Rs. 30,000/- per acre as has been done and the same deserves to be reduced. Sale deed referred to above by the learned counsel for the land owners cannot be considered for the reason that the comparison thereof cannot be made with the acquired land which was acquired for the purpose of construction of a drain. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. The sale deed sought to be relied upon by the learned counsel for the land owners cannot be relied upon for the purpose of determination of fair value of the acquired land for the reason that the location of the land dealt with therein is not known. Unless the location of the land can be compared, it is not safe to rely upon any sale transaction even if it pertained to the same village as there are always different location of the land in a village. It could be close to the village abadi. It can be abetting the main highway, in case location of the village is such or some road etc. The land dealt with in sale deed Ex.P1 having been purchased by the District Welfare Officer, Faridkot, it can be presumed that same would not be agricultural kind of land and would be either on the road or in the abadi. RFA No. 652 of 1993 3 For the reasons mentioned above, I do not find any reason to enhance the compensation any further. As far as the claim of the State is concerned, considering the fact that the enhancement granted by learned Court below was merely Rs. 30,000/- per acre and the acquisition in the present case having been made 26 years back, I do not find any reason to reduce the compensation. For the reasons mentioned above, the appeals are dismissed. (RAJESH BINDAL) 19.3.2010 JUDGE Reema