RFA No.1362 of 1993 (18) 1 In the Punjab and Haryana High Court,at Chandigarh. RFA No. 1362 of 1993 Decided on December 23,2008. Amrik Singh and another --- Appellants vs. State of Punjab and another ---Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Kulwant Singh,Advocate, for Mr.J.S.Wasu,Advocate,Senior Advocate, for the appellants in the appeals filed by the claimants/land owners and for the respondents in the appeals filed by the State of Punjab. Mr.N.S.Pawar, Addl.A.G.Punjab, for the respondents in the appeals filed by the claimants/landowners and for the appellants in the appeals filed by the State of Punjab. Rakesh Kumar Jain,J: This judgment shall dispose of 18 Regular First Appeals bearing Nos. 1362, 1642, 1363, 1364, 1365, 1366, 1641, 1649, 2916, 2917, 2918,2920,2921,2922, 2923,2924, 2925 and 3509 of 1993 filed by the claimants/land owners as well as by the State of Punjab as common question of law and facts are involved therein. Vide notification dated 30.8.1988 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short,'the Act') followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act dated 1.10.1988, land measuring 10.24. acres of village Powala, Had Bast No.243, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala, was RFA No.1362 of 1993 (18) 2 acquired by the State of Punjab for the construction of Lower Branch Canal. The Land Acquisition Collector, SYL Canal Project Punjab, vide his award No. 416/P-SYL dated 27.2,1990,determined the compensation of the acquired land as under:- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sr.No. Class of land Area Rate per acre. B- B 1. Chahi 44-3 Rs.62,000/- 2. Barani 6-15 Rs.50,000/- 3. Gair Mumkin 0-8 Rs.35,000/- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 51 -6 - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Unsatisfied with the award under Section 11 of the Act, the land owners/claimants filed objections under Section 18 of the Act and claimed compensation @ Rs. 5,00,000/-per acre on the ground that the acquired land possesses high potentiality and used to yield three crops in a year. However, the respondent/State asserted that due compensation has already been awarded by the Collector after considering all the circumstances including location, nature,quality and potentiality of the land. The claimants/landowners examined Parmod Kumar Halqa Patwari, Powala, Tehsil Bassi as AW-1 who tendered Aks-shajra of village Powala as Ex.A1 and stated that in the plan Ex. A-1, location of the acquired land for SYL Canal has been shown at point 'A'. He further stated that the distributory for which the disputed land has been acquired emanates from the canal and the quality of the disputed land is identical with the land acquired earlier for the SYL Canal. He also stated that village Powala is RFA No.1362 of 1993 (18) 3 within the periphery of capital town of Chandigarh. In the cross examination, AW-1 stated that village Powala is on the link road which joins Sirhind Landran road. Landran is 10 kilometers from Pawala. Chandigarh is 14 kilometers from Landran. He deposed that he has seen the distributory which is kacha and SYL is one Kilometer from village abadi whereas the distributory is ½ kilometer from the abadi. Gurdev Singh, one of the claimants, was examined as AW-2, who deposed that the land was acquired for the construction of distributory. Earlier land of village Powala was acquired for SYL Canal. The distributory emanates from canal. The quality of the disputed land is superior to the earlier acquired land. Market value of the acquired land at the time of notification was Rs. 3,00,000/- per acre. In the cross examination, he deposed that distributory is for the benefit of the agricultural land . Village Powala is on a link road. Banur is 10 kilometer from his village. Besides this oral evidence, the award of the learned Addl. District Judge, Patiala dated 1.2.1993 was tendered as Ex.A-2 and award pertaining to village Powala dated 31.8.1989 rendered by the High Court was tendered as Ex.A-3. In rebuttal, Jagat Singh, Kanungo, Office of Land Acquisition Officer, Patiala was examined as RW-1 ,who tendered into evidence sale deeds Exs. R-2 and R-3. The sale deed tendered by the respondents-State i.e. Ex. R-2 dated 18.2.1985 pertains to an area of 10 bighas 16 biswas sold for Rs. 13,500/- which comes to Rs. 6144/- per acre. Sale deed Ex R-3 dated 17.4.1985 is regarding area measuring 16 bighas- 15 biswas alienated for Rs.45,000/- which comes to Rs. 12,664/-per acre, whereas the Land Acquisition Collector had awarded compensation @ Rs.35,000/- per acre for the inferior-most type of the land. Hence, the sale deeds Ex.R2-and R-3 RFA No.1362 of 1993 (18) 4 are of no relevance so far as determination of compensation in these cases is concerned. On the other hand, site plan Ex A-1 shows the situation of the acquired land at point 'A'. The disputed land has been acquired for the distributory which emanates from the canal, whereas the land for the purpose of construction of the canal was acquired vide notification dated 13.12.1982 and the compensation was determined by the High Court vide its judgment Ex. A-3 dated 31.8.1989 @ Rs.1,25,000/- per acre for Chahi land, Rs.75,000/- per acre for Barani and Rs.55,000/- per acre for Banjar. The same rates have been awarded by the learned District Judge, Patiala for the acquisition dated 07.10.1985 of village Bassian, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala for the construction of SYL link canal vide his award dated 08.2.1990. Relying upon the award Ex.A-3, the learned Addl.District Judge, Patiala vide his award dated 1.2.1993 granted the same compensation for Chahi land @ Rs.1,25,000/- per acre, for Barani land @ Rs.75,000/- per acre and for Banjar land @ Rs. 55,000/- per acre. Mr.Kulwant Singh, learned counsel appearing for Mr.J.S.Wasu, learned Senior Advocate, for the claimants/landowners has argued that the compensation @ Rs. 1,25,000/- per acre for Chahi land, Rs. 75,000/- per acre for Barani land and Rs. 55,000/- per acre for Banjar land was assessed by the High Court for the acquisition dated 13.12.1982,whereas in the present cases, the acquisition of the same village is dated 30.8.1988. Therefore, the Court should take a judicial notice in respect of the rise in prices of the real estate and enhance the compensation by giving at least 12% per annum increase from 1982 to 1988 over and above the compensation assessed by the High Court pertaining to the land of village RFA No.1362 of 1993 (18) 5 Powala which was acquired on 13.12.1982. On the other hand, Mr. N.S. Pawar, learned Addl. Advocate General,appearing for the State of Punjab has contended that no evidence has been led by the landowners/claimants to show increase in the price of land in village Powala during the year 1982 to 1988 as no sale deed has been produced on record. I have heard the counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance. It is not disputed that the land of village Powala was earlier acquired vide notification dated 13.12.1982 for the construction of SYL Canal. The matter of compensation was settled by this Court vide judgment Ex. A-3 dated 31.8.1989 and the compensation was assessed for Chahi @ Rs.1,25,000/- per acre; for Barani @ Rs.75,000/- per acre and for Banjar @ Rs.55,000/- per acre. There is also no dispute that the land of the same village Powala has now been acquired for the construction of Lower Branch Canal vide notification under Section 4 of the Act issued on 30.8.1988 for which the learned Reference Court awarded the same rates which were awarded when the land was acquired for construction of SYL on 13.12.1982, the question that has been raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that whether the claimants are entitled to an increase of 12% per annum over and above the amount of compensation determined on 13.12.1982 for a gap of six years from the notification issued on 13.12.1982 till the notification issued on 30.8.1988 in the present cases. The learned Reference Court has declined an increase on the ground that the plan Ex. A-1 shows that the land in question covers a long area extending from SYL Canal to the extreme other side and there is no RFA No.1362 of 1993 (18) 6 evidence of the market value of the land having been increased from 1982 to 1988. It was also observed that the village Powala falls within the peripheri of capital town of Chandigarh where alienation of land is restricted by Periphery Control Act. On these cumulative factors, the learned Reference Court declined to award an increase of 12% as prayed by the claimants. Learned counsel for the appellants has relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Lal Chand (died) thru. LRs v. State of Punjab and another 2005 (2) LACC 228 to contend that enhancement can be granted on account of time period. In the said case, notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 28.8.1985 to acquire 15.50 acres of land situated in village Khera Gajju,Tehsil Rajpura,District Patiala for the purposes of the construction of SYL Canal. Section 6 notification of theAct was issued on 30.9.1985. The Land Acquisition Collector, SYL Project awarded compensation on 5.8.1987 @ Rs.62,000/- per acre for Chahi land; Rs.50,000/- per acre for Barani land; and Rs.35,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin land. The learned Reference Court re-determined the compensation of the land @ Rs.1,24,000/- per acre for Chahi land; Rs.74,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin land. In the said case, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants relied upon a judgment of this Court in RFA No.2807 of 1987 whereby compensation of the land acquired in the same village vide notification dated 30.12.1982 was awarded @ Rs.1,24,000/- per acre for Chahi land; Rs. 74,000/- per acre for Gair- Mumkin land. On this ground, it was urged that in that case, compensation for the notification dated 30.12.1982 was Rs. 1,24,000/- per acre and the RFA No.1362 of 1993 (18) 7 same compensation cannot be given for the acquisition of land acquired on 28.8.1985. It was contended that on this analogy, this Court in another case bearing RFA No. 2911of 1989 (Prem Chand another v. State of Punjab) awarded compensation by giving rise of 12% for three years @ Rs.1,32,000/- per acre for Chahi land, Rs.79,000/- per acre for Gair- Mumkin land. In the said case, this Court found that that acquisition relates to the same village Khera Gajju and for the same purpose, therefore, 3 year's increase for the subsequent notification was granted. In the present case also, land of village Powala, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala was acquired initially under Section 4 of the Act on 13.12.1982 for construction of SYL Canal and and the High Court vide its judgment Ex. A-3 dated 31.8.1989 determined the compensation @ Rs.1,25,000/- per acre for Chahi, Rs.75,000/- per acre for Barani and Rs.55,000/- per acre for Banjar, whereas the present acquisition is of 30.8.1988 of the same village Pawala and almost same purpose of construction of Lower Branch Canal (distributory of SYL) and inspite of expiry of six years, same compensation has been awarded which awarded for the acquisition of 1982. Learned counsel for the appellants has also relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Special Land Acquisition Officer BYDA, Bagalkot vs. Mohd.Hanif Sahib Bawa Sahib,AIR 2002 Supreme Court 1558 and contended that at least 10% increase should be granted for every year. In my view, the contention of learned counsel for the appellants is justified and the appellants are held entitled to an increase of 10% for the gap of six year for the year 1982 to 1988. For the reasons mentioned here-in-above, the present appeals RFA No.1362 of 1993 (18) 8 are allowed as indicated above along-with all statutory benefits in terms of the provisions of Amended Act with costs of the appeals, whereas the appeals filed by the State of Punjab are found to be without any merit and the same are hereby dismissed. December 23,2008 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge