RFA No.2785 of 2002 -1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.2785 of 2002 Date of Decision: 30.3.2009 Hari Singh and another ..Appellants. Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh ..Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.P.C.Dhiman, Mr.R.K.Dhiman and Mr.D.S.Raghu, Advocates for the claimants/appellants. Mrs.Lisa Gill, Mr.Deepak Sharma, Mr.Vishal Sodhi and Mr.Sanjeev Ghai, Advocates for UT Chandigarh. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. By this common order, I shall be disposing of 271 Regular First Appeals bearing Nos.2785, 2786, 891, 968 to 982, 1060, 1352, 1355, 1821 to 1824, 1841, 1982, 1983, 2024, 2533, 3837 to 3858 with X Objection No.69-CI of 2003, 3859 to 3868, 3470, 3884, 3885 of 2002, 96 to 107, 249, 250, 254, 267 of 2005, 2623, 2624, 2626 to 2628, 2630 to 2639 of 2004, 4005, 4470, 3988 to 4004 of 2001, 4175 to 4177, 4191 to 4196 of 2001, 5107 to 5118 of 2001, 5739 to 5744 of 2001, 2206 to 2250, 2281, 2282, 2313, 2362, 3932, 3958 of 2002, 1128 of 2003, 2438, 2440, 2442 of 2004, 2921 to 2930, 3494 to 3505 of 2003, 3659, 3662, 3663, 3666 to 3670, 3674 to 3678, 3680 to 3682, 3685, 3691, 3703, 3849, 3953, 4717 of 2003, 443 to 445 of 2005, 515, 775, 1211, 1212 of 2004, 1097, 1098 of 2003, 1493, 1494 of 2003, 840, 841 of 2002, 1552, 2291, 1950 to 1952 of 2002, 3924 to RFA No.2785 of 2002 -2 - 3927, 3929 to 3931, 1053 of 2002, 1522, 2444, 2445 of 2004 and 1210 of 2004 with X Objection No.108-CI of 2005 filed by the land owners/claimants as well as UT Chandigarh in which identical question of law and facts are involved. However, the facts are being extracted from RFA No.2785 of 2002 titled as Hari Singh and another Vs. UT Chandigarh. Brief facts culled out from the record are that vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short `the Act') dated 15.5.1998 with a follow up notification of declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act dated 3.3.1999, land measuring 130.69 acres of village Jhumroo, Hadbast No.260 was acquired for the public purpose, namely, for development of third Phase of Sectors 48 and 49, Chandigarh. The Land Acquisition Collector, (for short `the Collector') vide his award No.530/LAO dated 24.11.1999, granted compensation @ Rs.4,70,000/- per acre for all kinds of lands except Gair Mumkin Khadans i.e. Nala, River Bed and Choe for which compensation was assessed @ Rs.1,95,833/- per acre. Dissatisfied claimants carried the Objections filed under Section 18 of the Act through the Collector to the Civil Court for reassessment of compensation and in order to prove their case, examined Shamsher Singh, Field Kanungo as PW1, Sanjiv Kumar, Clerk, Finance Department as PW2, Narinder Verma, Clerk, Estate Office, U.T.Chandigarh as PW3, Baldev Singh, Superintendent Office of Chief Engineer as PW4, Kamlesh Puri, Sr.Assistant, Chandigarh Housing Board as PW5, Gurmeet Singh as PW6, Harnek Singh, Sr.Planning Draftsman as PW7, Sher Singh as PW8, Sunil Kumar, Patwari as PW9 and tendered into evidence certified copies of awards and sale deeds Ex.P42 to Ex.P50 and closed their evidence. The RFA No.2785 of 2002 -3 - respondent, however, tendered into evidence certified copies of sale deeds Ex.R1 to Ex.R3 and closed their evidence. The learned Reference Court discussed the entire evidence but relied upon a previous award Ex.P48 whereby LAC Case No.596 dated 28.7.2000 filed by Jeet Singh son of Mit Singh against the same acquisition, was allowed by Sh.S.K.Goel, Addl.District Judge, Chandigarh and enhanced the compensation of acquired land from Rs.4,70,000/- per acre to Rs.9,07,500/- per acre for Chahi land and from Rs.1,95,833/- per acre to Rs.3,78,124/- per acre for the acquisition of land of Nadi, Nala and Choe. The learned Reference Court vide its impugned award dated 7.12.2001 awarded similar compensation in the present case @ Rs.9,07,500/- per acre for Chahi land and Rs.3,78,124/- per acre for Nadi, Nala and Choe. Still not satisfied, the claimants have come up in appeal before this Court. Sh.P.C.Dhiman, learned counsel for the appellants has referred to document Mark B on record, which is a decision of Single Bench of this Court in RFA No.2169 of 1998 titled as Sukhpal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh whereby compensation @ Rs.5,50,000/- per acre with statutory benefits was assessed for the land acquired vide notification dated 11.10.1991 in the revenue estate of village Jhumroo for the purpose of development of third Phase of Chandigarh i.e. Sectors 48 ad 49. After referring to Mark B, learned counsel for the appellants has referred to another decision of this Court by a Single Bench in the case bearing RFA No.2326 of 1998 titled as Som Nath and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh decided on 3.9.2008 by Hon'ble Mr.Justice Rajesh RFA No.2785 of 2002 -4 - Bindal. In the case of Som Nath and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra), land of village Jhumroo was acquired for development of third Phase of Sectors 48 and 49 vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Act dated 11.10.1991 followed by notification of declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act dated 10.1.1992 in which the Collector had awarded Rs.1,90,000/- per acre on 8.7.1992. Initially, in respect of Objections under Section 18 of the Act, the learned Reference Court dismissed the reference vide judgment dated 29.11.1996 and maintained the award of the Collector. Later on in another reference vide judgment dated 21.4.1998, the Reference Court awarded compensation @ Rs.4,35,600/- per acre. Still in another reference, vide judgment dated 10.8.2000, the amount of compensation was enhanced to Rs.5,50,000/- per acre by relying upon Single Bench judgment of this Court dated 7.10.1999 rendered in the case of Sukhpal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra). The said judgment of Sukhpal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra) rendered in RFA No.2169 of 1998 dated 7.10.1999 was challenged by the land owners relying upon earlier judgment in LPA No.58 of 2000 Bhajan Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh decided on 25.10.2004 which had arisen out of RFA No.2511 of 1997 and was remanded back to learned Single Judge for fresh consideration. In this manner, the case of Somnath and others Vs. UT Chandigarh in RFA No.2326 of 1998 along with other similar cases came up for consideration before Single Bench of this Court in which learned Single Judge found that land forming part of villages Kajheri and Nizampur Burail was acquired on 8.7.1988 and land of village Nizampur Kumbra was acquired on 29.7.1988 RFA No.2785 of 2002 -5 - for the purpose of development of third Phase of Chandigarh. The matter in respect of compensation of the land of village Kajheri was decided by Single Bench of this Court in RFA No.2511 of 1997 titled as Bhajan Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh on 29.11.2006, in respect of land of village Nizampur Burail the matter was decided in RFA No.1339 of 1996 titled as Bhopal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh and in respect of land of village Nizampur Kumbra the matter was decided in RFA No.99 of 1998 titled as Harchal Singh and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh on 29.11.2006. In all the three appeals referred to above, the Court determined the compensation @ Rs.7,50,000/- per acre irrespective of the category of land. The compensation awarded in the cases of Bhajan Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh, Bhopal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh and Harchal Singh and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh became final as no appeal was filed by the Union Territory, Chandigarh against the judgment of Single Bench of this Court. Thus, while considering the case of Som Nath and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra) in RFA No.2326 of 1998, learned Single Judge granted 10% increase per annum for a period of three years and two months for the time gap for the acquisition in the cases of Bhopal Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra), Bhajan Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra), Harchal Singh and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra) and the present acquisition of October, 1991 and increased the compensation to the tune of Rs.2,35,000/- per acre over and above Rs.7,50,000/- per acre. Thus, compensation to the tune of Rs.9,85,000/- per acre was awarded to the claimants. RFA No.2785 of 2002 -6 - Learned counsel for the appellants has further relied upon decision of this Court in RFA No.3921 of 2007 titled as Arunash Chander Kaushik and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh dated 10.2.2009. In respect of the said case, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that Chandigarh Administration vide notification dated 20.8.1998 issued under Section 4 of the Act, acquired 182.87 acres of land forming part of the revenue estate of villages Nizampur Burail, Nizampur Kumbra, Kajheri and Jhumroo for the development of third Phase of Chandigarh which was followed by a notification of declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act dated 16.11.1998. The Collector valued the acquired land @ Rs.8,28,750/- per acre for village Nizampur Kumbra, Rs.8,18,573/- per acre for village Kajheri, Rs.7,71,735/- per acre for village Burail and Rs.4,98,102/- per acre for village Jhumroo. In Objections under Section 18 of the Act, the learned Reference Court reassessed the market value of the acquired land in all the aforesaid villages @ Rs.13,44,000/- per acre and for low lying area as Khadan, Gair Mumkin Nadi and Choe @ Rs.5,59,592/- per acre. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that in the case of Arunash Chander Kaushik and others (supra), a decision of this Court in RFA No.727 of 2001 titled as Narinder Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh decided on 4.2.2009 was relied upon whereby compensation of the acquired land was assessed @ Rs.15,46,450/- per acre. In the case of Narinder Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra), notification was issued on 3.7.1997. The learned Single Judge while deciding the case of Arunash Chander Kaushik and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra), granted an increase of 12% on the amount of Rs.15,46,450/- assessed in the RFA No.2785 of 2002 -7 - case of Narinder Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra) as there was a difference of one year, one month and 17 days in the notification of acquisitions issued under Section 4 of the Act in the cases of Arunash Chander Kaushik and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra) and Narinder Singh Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra). The learned Single Judge awarded Rs.1,85,574/- per acre while calculating increase @ 12% on Rs.15,46,450/- per acre for the period of one year, one month and 17 days and granted Rs.17,32,024/- per acre which was rounded off Rs.17,32,000/- per acre for the land except Gair Mumkin Nadi, Choe and Khadan. In respect of the land recorded as Gair Mumkin Nadi, Choe and Khadan, compensation was assessed @ Rs.7,21,656/- per acre rounded off to Rs.7,21,700/- per acre. After referring to the previous awards in the cases of Som Nath and others Vs. UT Chandigarh (supra) and Arunash Chander Kaushik and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra), counsel for the appellants has argued that the present notification was issued on 15.5.1998 under Section 4 of the Act for the acquisition of land of village Jhumroo whereas in the case of Arunash Chander Kaushik and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra), notification was issued on 20.8.1998 under Section 4 of the Act for the acquisition of land of village Jhumroo and the purpose for both the acquisitions was same i.e. for the development of third Phase of Sectors 48 and 49 Chandigarh. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that since in the present case, notification under Section 4 of the Act is 3 months earlier than the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act in the case of Arunash Chander Kaushik and others RFA No.2785 of 2002 -8 - Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra), therefore, on the same analogy of 12%, amount of 3 % for three months may be deducted from the value arrived at Rs.17,32,000/- per acre which comes to Rs.51,960/- per acre and the appellants be awarded Rs.16,80,040/- per acre. On the other hand, Mrs.Lisa Gill, learned counsel appearing on behalf of UT Chandigarh has vehemently contended that sale deeds Ex.R1 to Ex.R3 have not been duly appreciated by the Court below. Sale deed Ex.R1 is dated 13.6.97 vide which 1 Kanal 8 ½ Marlas was sold for Rs.60,000/-, sale deed Ex.R2 dated 25.10.1996 is with regard to 6 Kanal 17 Marlas of land sold for Rs.2,70,000/- and sale deed Ex.R3 dated 8.5.1997 vide which 7 Kanals 1 Marla of land was sold for a consideration of Rs.1,68,000/-. In my view, none of the sale deeds is valued more than the award of the Collector, who has awarded Rs.4,70,000/- per acre. Therefore, these sale deeds have to be kept out of consideration in view of Section 25 of the Act. Learned counsel for the respondent has further argued that there is no provision in law for granting 12% increase per year. In this regard, she relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mehtab Singh and others Vs. State of Haryana (1994) 6 SCC 64. In order to counter this argument, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Om Parkash (dead) by LRs and others Vs. Union of India and another (2004) 10 SCC 627. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record thoroughly. RFA No.2785 of 2002 -9 - It is now settled by this Court that the value of land of village Jhumroo, which has been acquired vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Act dated 20.8.1998 in the case of Arunash Chander Kaushik and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh for development of third Phase of Sectors 48 and 49 Chandigarh is Rs.17,32,000/- per acre for the land except Gair Mumkin Nadi, Choe and Khadan, which is separately valued at Rs.7,21,700/- per acre. The present acquisition is three months prior to the acquisition in the case of Arunash Chander Kaushik and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra) and in this view of the matter, appropriate compensation can be assessed by deducting three months' value from the amount of compensation determined in the case of Arunash Chander Kaushik and others Vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (supra) which comes to Rs.51,960/-. Thus, after deducting Rs.51,960/- from Rs.17,32,000/- compensation @ Rs.16,80,040/- is assessed for the land except Gair Mumkin Nadi, Choe and Khadan. Similarly if the value of three months is reduced from Rs.7,21,700, then the value of the land recorded in the revenue record as Gair Mumkin Nadi, Choe and Khadan comes to Rs.7,00,049/- which is rounded off as Rs.7,00,050/-. In view of the above discussion, the present appeals and Cross Objection are allowed. The appellants shall be entitled to Rs.16,80,040/- per acre for the land other than Gair Mumkin, Nadi, Choe and Khadan and @ Rs.7,00,050/- per acre for the land recorded in the revenue record as Gair Mumkin Nadi, Choe and Khadan.The appellants shall also be entitled to all the statutory benefits in terms of the provisions of Amended Act and costs of these appeals. So far as the appeals filed by the UT Chandigarh are RFA No.2785 of 2002 -10 - concerned, the same are hereby dismissed without any order as to costs. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 30.3.2009 Judge Meenu