R.F.A. No. 734 of 1997 [ 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 734 of 1997 (O&M) Date of decision: 25.1.2011 Krishan Kumar ..... Appellant Versus The State of Haryana and another ....... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Gorakh Nath and Mr. Ram Kumar Saini for Mr. G. S. Hooda, Advocates for the land owners. Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. for the State. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of R.F.A. Nos. 734 and 879 of 1997, as common questions of law and facts are involved. The land owners are in appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts are that land measuring 9 kanals 12 marlas, situated in village Dhani Jatan, Hadbast No. 117, Tehsil Ellenabad, District Sirsa sought to be acquired by Government of Haryana vide notification dated 3.1.1989, published on 17.1.1989, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for construction of PWD Rest House at Ellenabad. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector'), vide his award dated 8.5.1990, assessed the market value of the acquired land at ` 15,040/- per acre. Feeling dissatisfied, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value at ` 3,90,000/- per acre. Vide same notification, adjoining land situated in the revenue estate of Ellenabad, Hadbast No. 113 measuring 4 kanals 10 marlas was acquired for the same purpose. The Collector assessed the market value of the land @ ` 45,120/- per acre. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value at ` 3,90,000/- per acre. R.F.A. No. 734 of 1997 [ 2] Learned counsel for the land owners submitted that the acquired land is located near the main Bazar on Ellenabad-Sirsa road. Abadi of Ellenabad is just opposite the acquired land. There are residential and commercial establishments near the acquired land. It had great future potential. As the acquired land falls in an already developed area, no cut was required to be applied by the learned court below in the sale consideration of land pertaining to sale deed (Ex. P14), whereby two marlas of land was sold for ` 8,000/-. It was registered on 14.7.1988. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the award of compensation in the present case by the learned court below is exhorbitant, as the enhancement is from ` 15,040/- to ` 3,90,000/- per acre. The learned court below had merely relied upon one sale deed (Ex. P14) produced by the land owners, whereas sale deeds (Ex. R1 to R11) produced by the State, which fully justified the award of the Collector, the same being much more than the value depicted in those sale deeds, have been totally ignored. He further submitted that the learned court below has gone wrong in observing that certified copies of sale-deeds produced on record could not be considered as the vendors and the vendees had not been produced. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. The land involved in the present cases is 14 kanals and 2 marlas, which was acquired for the purpose of construction of a PWD Rest House. It pertains to revenue estates of two villages, namely, Dhani Jatan and Ellenabad, though a compact block. In the evidence led by the land owners and also as is evident from site plan (Ex. P12) produced by them on record, it was proved that the acquired land is located on Ellenabad-Sirsa road. It falls within the municipal limits of Ellenabad. Octroi Post on this road was 1-1/2 kilometers towards Sirsa. The bus stand was about two killas away from the acquired land. The entire area in the vicinity was already developed and commercialised. In fact, the abadi of Deh Har Chand Ka Bass, Ward No. 10, Ellenabad was just opposite the acquired land. Grain market and Railway Station were not far off. Though the land owners had produced various sale deeds on record, most of them were not considered by the learned court below on the ground that vendors and vendees had not been produced. This may be correct view considering the position of law at R.F.A. No. 734 of 1997 [ 3] that stage, however, in view of subsequent judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Cement Corporation of India Ltd. etc. v. Purya and others, AIR 2004 SC 4830, the vendors and vendees are not required to be produced and the certified copy of the sale deed is admissible as such in evidence. It has also come on record that land pertaining to sale deed (Ex. P14) dated 14.7.1988, whereby two marlas of land purchased by one Hardial, was part of the acquired land. The genuineness of the aforesaid sale deed was not disputed by the State. In the other sale deeds produced by the land owners, the value of the land shown therein varied from ` 3,33,636/- to ` 32,00,000/- per acre. The learned court below found the sale deed (Ex. P14) forming part of the acquired land to be the most relevant piece of evidence and considering the fact that the same was for two marlas of land and the acquisition in the present case was for 14 kanals and 2 marlas, applied a cut of 40% therein and adding for the time gap of six months therein @ ` 1,000/- per acre determined the compensation at ` 3,90,000/- per acre which, in my opinion, considering the location of the land and its potentiality cannot be said to be on the lower side. The sale deeds produced by the State were rightly discarded by the learned court below for various reasons, first being that the value shown in all the sale deeds was less than the award of the Collector. The notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case was issued on 3.1.1989 and published on 17.1.1989. Sale deeds (Ex. R6, R10 and R11) were registered after the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, therefore, were not relevant. Sale deeds (Ex. R1 to Ex. R5) were registered much prior to the acquisition of the land. The land pertaining to sale deeds (Ex. R6 to Ex. R11) was located far off from the main road leading from Ellenabad to Sirsa. RW3- Vijay Kumar even admitted that the same was located 20 killas deep from the main road, whereas the land in question is situated on main Sirsa-Ellenabad road. In view of the aforesaid factual position, the established fact on record being that the land pertaining to none of the sale deeds produced by the State was comparable in its location with the acquired land, the learned court below did not commit any illegality in not considering those sale deeds as relevant piece of evidence. R.F.A. No. 734 of 1997 [ 4] For the reasons mentioned above, the appeals are dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 25.1.2011 mk