IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA: 1. RFA.No. 48 of 2003. 2. RFA.No.49 of 2003. 3. RFA.No.50 of 2003 . Date of Decision :3rd April, 2008. RFA.No. 48 of 2003. Ram Ditta. …Appellant Versus: L.A.C. …Respondent. RFA. No.49 of 2003 Prem Singh. …Appellant Versus: L.A.C. …Respondent. RFA. No.50 of 2003. Krishnu Ram and others. …Appellant Versus: L.A.C. …Respondent. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge. Whether approved for judgment?1 For the appellant: Mr.Ramakant Sharma, Advocate. . For Respondent. Mr.Vivek Thakur, Addl. Advocate General with Ms.Subh Mahajan, Deputy Advocate General. Sanjay Karol, J(Oral). The present appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment as the appellants’ land was acquired by a common Notification and award passed under the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act’). 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 The land owners reference petitions under Section 18 of the Act were dismissed by separate award dated 21st August, 1998 passed by District Judge, Bilaspur. The issue in all the appeals being RFA No. 48 of 2003 titled as Ram Ditta Vs. LAC (Land Reference Case No. 2 of 1993); RFA No. 49 of 2003 titled as Prem Singh Vs. L.A.C. (Land Reference Case No. 3 of 199) and RFA.No.50 of 2003 titled as Krishnu Ram and others Vs. L.A.C. (Land Reference Case No.15 of 1996) are also similar. The appellants’ land situated in village Kahali, P.O.Deoth, Teshsil Sadar, District Bilaspur was acquired for public purpose, namely, construction of Brahm-Pukhar-Deoth Sali road vide notification dated 23rd November, 1981 issued under Section 4 of the Act which was published in H.P. Rajpatra on 15th May, 1992. The Collector in terms of his common award dated 14th February, 1982 awarded compensation at different rates for different categories of land as under: (i) Kharetar. Rs. 107-00 Per Bigha. (ii) Kohli Awal. Rs. 1554-00 -do- (iii) Kohli Doem. Rs. 1340-00 -do- (iv) Anderli Awal. Rs. 1106-00 -do- (v) Anderli Doem. Rs. 893-00 -do- (vi) Bahrli Awal. Rs. 661-00 -do- (vii) Bahrli Doem. Rs. 339-00. -do- Aggrieved by the same the land owners filed different reference petitions under Section 18 of the Act. The 3 claimants sought enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Collector on the basis of sale deeds Ext. PW-1/A and Ext.PW-1/B placed on record during the trial. The petitioners also examined themselves as witnesses. It is a matter on record that no evidence whatsoever was led by the State except for placing on record a copy of the sale deed Ext.RC and the award dated 14th February, 1982 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, Bilaspur with respect to the construction of the same road where the land was acquired in village Bhajun. The court below dismissed the claim petitions on the ground that the sale deeds could not be referred to and relied upon to determine the fair market value of the land for determining the compensation payable to the petitioners for the reason that the vendor or vendee were not examined during the trial. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. In view of the decision rendered by the apex Court in Rattan Kumar Tandon and others vs. State of Utter Pradesh, AIR 1996 S.C. 2710, the vendor and vendee need not be examined to prove the sale deeds which are sought to be referred to and relied upon for determining the market value of the acquired land and compensation payable to the claimants. Therefore the sale deeds can be looked into. 4 However, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that Ext.PX, a copy of the award dated 10th June, 1997 passed by the same District Judge in another Land Reference Petition arising out of the very same acquisition is on record and it should be made basis for determining the compensation and deciding the present appeals. Perusal of Ext.PX would show that the Land Reference No. 1 of 1994 titled as Balwant Vs. L.A.C. , the land belonging to Sh. Balwant Singh was acquired vide same notification and award issued under Sections 4 and 11 of the Act. As per this award the land owners were awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per bigha. Admittedly this award has attained finality and the compensation awarded has been disbursed to the claimants. Ram Ditta as PW-1 in RFA.No. 48 of 2003, Krishnu Ram as PW-1 in RFA.No. 50 of 2003 and Prem Singh as PW-1 in RFA.No. 49 of 2003 have referred to the acquisition of the land of Shri Balwant Singh and have also stated that the said acquired land is adjacent to their land. From the record, it is clear that the land which is the subject matter of acquisition in the present proceedings is adjoining to the land covered under award Ext.PX. It is undisputed that the land in question is also of the same village having same potentiality and nature. Therefore, in my view Ext. PX can safely be relied upon to determine the market value, to which the present appellants shall be 5 entitled to as just and fair compensation for the acquisition of their land. It be clarified that the learned counsel for the appellants has not relied upon the sale deeds mentioned herein-above. Therefore, it is held that the appellants shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per bigha. The appellants shall also be entitled to all statutory compensation and interest as envisaged under Sections 25(a), 23(2), 28, 33 (1-A) and 34 of the Act. The appellants shall be entitled to interest only from the date of the publication of the notification i.e. 12th April, 1982 issued under Section 4 of the Act. Needless to add, the compensation shall be paid to the appellants keeping in view the principles laid down by the apex court in Sunder Vs. Union of India (2001) 7 Supreme Court Cases 211. The present appeals are accordingly allowed. The respondent(s) shall deposit the amount in the Court within eight weeks from today. (Sanjay karol), Judge. April 3, 2008(R) 6