R. F. A No. 3229 of 1999 1 In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 17.11.2008 1. R. F. A No. 3229 of 1999 (O&M) Union of India and another ..... Appellants vs Harbans Kaur and another ... Respondents 2. R. F. A No. 3230 of 1999 (O&M) Union of India ..... Appellant vs Jarnail Singh ... Respondent 3. R. F. A No. 3231 of 1999 (O&M) Union of India and another ..... Appellants vs Chanan Singh and others ... Respondents 4. R. F. A No. 3232 of 1999 (O&M) Union of India ..... Appellant vs Sukhdev Singh ... Respondents 5. R. F. A No. 3239 of 1999 (O&M) Union of India ..... Appellant vs Jarnail Singh and another ... Respondents 6. R. F. A No. 195 of 2000 (O&M) Harban Kaur ... .. Appellant vs Union of India and others ..... Respondents 7. R. F. A No. 196 of 2000 (O&M) Chanan Singh and others ..... Appellants vs Union of India and others ..... Respondents 8. R. F. A No. 197 of 2000 (O&M) Sukhdev Singh ..... Appellant vs Union of India ..... Respondent R. F. A No. 3229 of 1999 2 9. R. F. A No. 198 of 2000 (O&M) Jarnail Singh and another ..... Appellants vs Union of India ..... Respondent 10. R. F. A No. 199 of 2000 (O&M) Jarnail Singh ..... Appellant vs Union of India ..... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Advocate, for Union of India. Mr. C. M.Munjal, Advocate, for the landowners. Mr. O. P. Dabla, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of Regular First Appeal Nos. 3229 to 3232, and 3239 of 1999 filed by the Union of India for reduction in the compensation and Regular First Appeal Nos. 195 to 199 of 2000 filed by the landowners seeking enhancement of compensation, as the same arise out of the same acquisition. However, the facts have been extracted from R. F. A. No. 3229 of 1999. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 11.8.1989, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), the State of Punjab acquired land in the revenue estate of Village Chak Arriyanwala, Tehsil Jalalabad, District Ferozepur for B. S. F. The Land Acquisition Collector assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 20,000/- per acre for chahi and Rs. 6,100/- per acre for banjar kind of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, the landowners/claimants filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 5.4.1999, determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 1,40,000/- per acre. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the value of the land as determined by the learned court below deserves to be increased further as it has not been fairly assessed, considering the material produced by them on record in the form of sale-deeds Ex. A-29, A-30 and A-31. The R. F. A No. 3229 of 1999 3 land in question is situated just half kilometer from the municipal limits of Jalalabad on Muktsar Road. The already urbanised area was not far off from the acquired land. There was lot of industrial activity in the area. Rice and cotton mills had been set up and demand of land for being used for industrial purpose was there. Vide sale-deed Ex. A-29 dated 23.5.1989 land measuring 10 marlas 6 sarsai was sold for Rs. 18,000/-, land measuring 8 marlas vide sale-deed Ex. A-30 dated 25.7.1989 was sold for Rs. 10,000/- and land measuring 8 marlas pertaining to sale-deed Ex. A-31 dated 20.7.1989 was sold for Rs. 18,000/-. The same were not considered at all for the purpose of determination of fair value of acquired land merely for the reason of these being small in size. At the most a reasonable cut could be applied thereon. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Union of India submitted that the compensation as assessed by the learned court below is far more than what was deserved. The report of Chandra Committee could not possibly be relied upon for determination of fair value as the same was only for the purpose of determination of minimum rates for registration of sale-deeds, which was ultimately set aside by Hon'ble the Supreme Court. He further submitted that the land pertaining to the sale-deeds sought to be relied upon by the landowners was situated on main Fazlika Road which cannot be considered for the purpose of determination of fair value of the acquired land which is situated on Muktsar Road. Heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance perused the relevant referred record. No site plan on record has been referred to by either of the parties to show the exact location of the land or the location of the land pertaining to the sale-deeds produced. A perusal of sale-deed Ex. A-29, A- 30 and A-31 shows that these are pertaining to small piece of land and located in certain developed colonies. The learned court below primarily relied upon Chandra Committee's report which had fixed the minimum rates for registration of sale-deeds in different areas including the land on Jalalabad-Muktsar Road which was fixed at Rs. 2,10,000/- per acre. It was on that basis and after applying a cut for the time gap the compensation was determined at Rs. 1,40,000/- per acre. Though the same cannot be said to be safe method for determination of fair value of acquired land but still if other R. F. A No. 3229 of 1999 4 material on record is considered, namely the acquisition of the land almost at the same time for B. S. F. Complex on Fazlika Road, as is noticed by the learned court below in para 17 of the award, the compensation there was fixed at Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre. None of the parties has pointed out as to whether any appeal was filed against the award for the land acquired on Fazlika Road. Even if it is considered the land on Fazlika Road is better located as compared to land on Muktsar Road, still it is noticed that the value of the acquired land therein was assessed at Rs. 2 lac per acre whereas in the present case it was determined at Rs. 1,40,000/- per acre. The location of the land in question is not disputed, which is just half kilometer from the municipal limits of Jalalabad and located close to abadi on Muktsar Road. In view of my above discussion, I do not find any merit in the present appeals. Accordingly, the same are dismissed. 17.11.2008 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge