RFA No.804 of 1989 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** RFA No.804 of 1989 Date of decision: 22.12.2008 **** Jagmal Singh . . . . Appellant Versus State of Haryana and another . . . . Respondents **** CORUM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN **** Present: Mr.C.B. Goel, Advocate with Mr. Manoj Sharma, Advocate, Ms.Suriti Kohli, Advocate, Mr.V.K. Jain, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Prashant Vashishth, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.H.S. Hooda, A.G. Haryana with Mr.Rajiv Kawatra, Sr.DAG, Haryana for the respondents. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN J. This judgment shall dispose of 18 Regular First Appeals, bearing RFA Nos.804 to 807, 809 to 813, 1001 to 1006, 1084, 1437 and 1447 of 1989 as common questions of law and facts are involved therein. Land situated in village Chakarpur was notified under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short ‘the Act’) on 25.2.1983. The Land Acquisition Collector (in short ‘the Collector) classified the acquired land as per their nature and kind and awarded the compensation as under: 1. Chahi Rs.1,26,000/- per acre 2. Banjar Rs.40,000/- per acre 3. Gair Mumkin Rs.30,000/- per acre RFA No.804 of 1989 - 2 - Unsatisfied with the award pronounced by the Collector, the landowners filed objections under Section 18 of the Act and alleged that the market value of the acquired land was not less than Rs.200/- per sq. yards at the time of the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. They also claimed compensation for super structure, trees and for the fragmentation. The State of Haryana resisted the claim of the landowners and averred that compensation assessed by the Collector is just and reasonable. It was submitted that there was no tree in the acquired land and the assessment report in respect of super structure was stated to be awaited. The landowners led voluminous evidence in order to prove the market value prevailing at the time of acquisition. The reference court found sale deeds Ex.P-76 (duplicate copy of which is Ex.P113) and Ex.P-77 (duplicate copy of which is Ex.P112) dated 31.12.1982 and 2.7.1982 respectively, to be relevant. Vide sale instance Ex.76, 2 Bighas 11 Biswas Pukhta land in village Chakarapur was sold for Rs.3,98,438/- and by sale instance Ex.P77, 8 Bighas 2 Biswas Pukhta land in village Chakarapur was sold for Rs.10,62,875/-. After taking average of these two sale instances, the value per acre was derived at Rs.2,19,540/- and was awarded to the landowners. The severance of land was found as per the following table: Case no. Land Acquired Land left unacquried Bighas Biswas Bighas Biswas Exhibits 75 1 17 10 6 Exs. P85 & P86 76 7 2 14 - Exs. P83 & P84 78 2 14 6 7 Exs. P50 & P75 79 1 17 3 12 Exs. P82 & P87 86 3 8 7 19 Exs. P67 & P118 87 6 3 16 19 Exs. P50 & P73 88 4 19 6 5 Exs. P62 & P68 89 4 5 7 4 Exs. P53 & P69 RFA No.804 of 1989 - 3 - 90 6 2 17 9 Exs. P94 & P74 91 4 18 6 10 Exs. P55 & P71 93 4 19 6 16 Exs. P57, 70 & 119 94 4 6 6 4 Exs. P58 & P72 102 11 12 11 16 Exs. P56 & P60 The learned reference Court observed that landowners are entitled to compensation for the unacquired land @ 50% of the market value but since they have limited their claim to a sum of Rs.50,000/- only, therefore, they were held entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- or the one worked out @ 50% of the market value, whichever is less. Sh.V.K. Jain, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant has urged that the total acquired land is 98 bigha 5 biswa pukhta equivalent to (73 acres 16 marlas). It is submitted that vide sale deed Ex.P76 dated 31.12.1982, 2 bigha 11 biswa pukhta (equivalent to 12 kanal 15 marla) was sold for Rs.3,98,438/- which comes to Rs.2,50,024/- per acre and vide Ex.P77 dated 2.7.1982, 8 bigha 2 biswas of land was sold which comes to Rs.2,09,954/- per acre. The learned counsel for the appellants/landowners submitted that the average of these two sale deeds i.e. Ex.P76 @ Rs.2,50,024/- and Ex.P77 @ Rs.2,09,954/- comes to Rs.4,59,978/- and on being divided by 2 comes to Rs.2,29,989/-. Thus an apparent error of calculation has been committed by the reference Court while assessing the average of the two sale deeds Ex.P76 and Ex.P77. The counsel for the appellant contended that the landowners should be awarded compensation as per the highest sale instance (Ex.P76) pertaining to village Chakarpur in which the value of the land comes out to be Rs.2,50,024/- per acre. It is further submitted that since the sale deed Ex.P76 is dated 31.12.1982 and the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 25.2.1983, the RFA No.804 of 1989 - 4 - appellants/landowners be also awarded an increase of two months over and above the value of the sale deed Ex.P76 without applying any deduction. It is contended by the counsel for the appellants that the reference Court had committed an error while awarding compensation for severance observing that since the appellants have curtailed their claim to a sum of Rs.50,000/- only in their claim-petition, therefore, they would be entitled to the said sum or the one worked out @ 50% of the market value whichever is less. It is submitted that the appellants may be awarded compensation for the severance of their land whichever is higher out of Rs.50,000/- or 50% of the market value. On the other hand, counsel for the respondent/State has contended that the total acquired land is 73 acres 16 marlas as regards that sale instance of Ex.P76 is of small piece of land measuring 12 kanals 15 marlas. Therefore, a usual cut of 33% should be applied. It is further submitted that so far as the severance charges are concerned, the claimants themselves have limited their claim upto an amount of Rs.50,000/-, therefore, they cannot be allowed to ask for more than the amount claimed in the claim-petition. The learned counsel for the respondent/State has not challenged the error pointed out by the counsel for the appellants in the calculation of the average price arrived at by the reference Court wherein the reference Court has awarded Rs.2,19,540/- however, average of Ex.P76 and P77 comes to Rs.2,29,989/-. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance. In these cases, the learned reference Court has taken an average of two sale deeds Ex.P76 and Ex.P77 as land involved in RFA No.804 of 1989 - 5 - both the sale deeds have common features. The learned reference Court, however, has apparently committed an error while calculating the amount of compensation because the average value per acre to be derived from sale deeds. Ex.P76 and Ex.P77 is not Rs.2,19,540/- per acre but Rs.2,29,989/- per acre. This calculation has not been disputed by the counsel for the State. Thus, in my view, the claimants are entitled to compensation @ Rs.2,29,989/- per acre for the acquired land. However, I do not find any merit in the contention of the counsel for the claimants that the claimants should be awarded compensation derived from the highest sale deed Ex.P76 and should also be awarded difference of two months as the sale deed Ex.P76 is dated 31.12.1982 and the notification under Section 4 of the Act is dated 25.2.1983. Since the sale deeds Ex.P76 and P77 pertains to an agricultural land and is comparable to the land under acquisition having common features, therefore, the method of deriving the average from the two sale deeds is not erroneous and illegal. Insofar as the claim of the compensation on the severance charges are concerned, the claimants have themselves restricted their claim to the tune of Rs.50,000/- of the market value. The learned reference Court has thus awarded Rs.50,000/- or 50% of the market value whichever is less. It is contended by the counsel for the respondent/State that the question whether the Court could grant compensation higher than the claim made by the party has been decided by the Supreme Court in the case of “Ujjain Vikas Pradhikaran (Ujjain Development Authority) Vs. Tarachand & another” JT 1996(7) Supreme Court 206, in which it was held that “It would be obvious that when a party claims compensation at a particular rate, he assesses the market value of the land at that particular rate and seeks compensation on that RFA No.804 of 1989 - 6 - basis. Having assessed the compensation at that particular rate, the question emerges: whether the Court could grant higher compensation than was assessed by the party? We find the answer in the negative”. It was held that the Court is precluded to award compensation beyond the amount claimed by the party and any award in excess thereof would be illegal. No judgment contrary to the aforesaid has been cited by the counsel for the claimants. No other point has been raised in these appeals. In view of the above discussion, the present appeals are partly allowed to the extent that the landowners/claimants shall be entitled to compensation of their land @ Rs.2,29,989/- with all statutory benefits in terms of the provisions of the amended Act alongwith the costs of the appeals. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 22.12.2008 JUDGE vivek