RFA No.664 of 1991 -1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.664 of 1991 Date of Decision: 3.12.2008 Sir Bachittar Singh and another ..Appellants. Vs. The State of Punjab and another ..Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.Vinod Kumar Kataria, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.N.S.Pawar, Addl.AG Punjab for the respondents. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This order shall dispose of 12 appeals, namely, RFA Nos.664 to 671, 738, 880, 1213 and 1219 of 1991 by a common judgment as common question of law and facts are involved in these appeals. Land measuring 34.75 acres situated in village Matta, Had Bast No.132, Tehsil and District Faridkot was notified on 24.8.1984 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short `the Act') and followed by notification of declaration dated 29.11.1984 under Section 6 of the Act for the construction of Sarawan Drain at public expense. Originally an area of 35.67 acres was notified under Section 6 of the Act but on actual measurements carried out at the site, area of 34.75 acres was found showing a decrease of 0.92 acres from the notified area, which was due to the different method of calculating the area by Karams and by feets by the Land Acquisition Staff. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award No.154 RFA No.664 of 1991 -2 - dated 11.7.1986 classified the acquired land i.e. Nehri - 265 Kanals 1 Marla, Barani - 7 Kanals 11 Marlas and Gair Mumkin - 5 Kanals 8 Marla total 278 Kanals. The Collector assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.17,100/- per acre for Nehri, Rs.14,000/- per acre for Barani and Rs.10,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the land owners- claimants preferred Objections under Section 18 of the Act alleging therein that the acquired land is close to commercial and dwelling complex and the price of the land is not less than Rs.80,000/- per acre. It was also alleged that the acquired land has been divided into two parts, therefore, a loss of Rs.4000/- has caused to them. The land owners also claimed damages to the tune of Rs.2000/- as barbed wires with pillars were destroyed and Rs.5000/- per annum for depositing the earth heaps in the area belonging to them. In the written statement, it was alleged by the State that compensation has been assessed as per the prevalent market rate. It was denied that the land owners-claimants are entitled to recover any amount on account of segregation of the land or damages to the barbed wire. It was also denied that any heaps of earth were deposited in the land left over from the acquisition. The learned Additional District Judge, Faridkot vide his order dated 3.10.1990 after taking into consideration the evidence led by both the parties awarded compensation and dismissed the reference upholding the award and awarded compensation at the enhanced rate of Rs.4000/- per acre in respect of all kinds of land in addition to the compensation already awarded to the land owners. Sh.Vinod Kumar Kataria, learned counsel for the appellants has RFA No.664 of 1991 -3 - vehemently contended that the Reference Court has committed a palpable error while discarding sale deed Ex.P2 which has been executed in respect of land measuring 2 Kanals 2 Marlas for a sum of Rs.13,600/- which comes to Rs.51,600/- per acre. Learned counsel further submitted that the sale deed was executed on 15.4.1982 whereas the acquisition in the present case is of 24.8.1984, therefore, in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Khan Chand Vs. State of Haryana 2008(2) RCR (Civil) 286, the compensation deserves to be enhanced giving 10% increase for the gap of two years from the date of sale deed and the date of acquisition and since the land which is sold vide sale deed Ex.P2, is a small piece of land, therefore, 40% cut can be applied. In this process, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the compensation would come to Rs.31,000/- per acre. As against this, Sh.N.S.Pawar, learned counsel for the State of Punjab has argued that the sale deed Ex.P2 pertains to village Guru Ki Dhab whereas the acquisition is of the land of village Matta. He also submits that there are 6 sale deeds produced by the State namely sale deed Ex.R1 pertaining to land measuring 16 Kanals sold on 31.5.1984 for Rs.33,000/-, sale deed Ex.R2 in respect of 16 Kanals of land sold for Rs.33,000/- on 29.5.1984 and sale deed Ex.R6 in respect of land measuring 20 Kanals 5 Marlas sold for Rs.42,000/-. So far as other sale deeds Ex.R3, R4 and R6 are concerned, those were not pressed by the learned counsel for the respondents. It is contended by the learned counsel for the State of Punjab that through these three sale deeds Ex.R1, Ex.R2 and Ex.R6, the land measuring 52 Kanals 5 Marlas was sold for a consideration of Rs.1,08,000/-. The average of these three sale deeds comes to less than RFA No.664 of 1991 -4 - Rs.17,000/- per acre. It is contended by the learned counsel that the judgment in the case of Khan Chand (supra) is not applicable and the learned Reference Court has rightly relied upon the sale deeds Ex.R1, Ex.R2 and Ex.R5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance. In so far as sale deed Ex.P2 is concerned that pertains to land measuring 2 Kanals 2 Marlas of a different village called Guru Ki Dhab of course, sale instance of a small piece of land in comparison to the acquired land. In the judgment of the Division Bench in the case of Khan Chand (supra), the facts were that there was only one sale deed Ex.P1 of the year 1980 pertaining to sale of one Kanal land, the value of which comes to Rs.1,44,000/-. In the said case, land was situated within the municipal limits of Kaithal and was merely two furlongs away from the city of Kaithal. Since there was no other evidence produced in the shape of sale deeds either by the land owners or by the State, the learned Division Bench relied upon solitary sale instance and after giving 10% increase for two years, since the acquisition was of the year 1980, calculated the value of the acquired land (on the basis of sale instance Ex.P1) to the tune of Rs.1,72,800/- per acre and after applying cut of 40% on the ground that sale instance Ex.P1 was pertaining to a small piece of land, awarded Rs.1,03,680/- per acre. The facts of this case are altogether different from the facts of the aforesaid judgment because in this case besides sale instance Ex.P2, there are sale instances which have been produced by the State of Punjab in the shape of Ex.R1 to Ex.R6 out of which the learned Reference Court has rightly not taken into consideration sale instances which were post notification and had RFA No.664 of 1991 -5 - considered only those sale instances which were in close proximity in time to the date of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act. The Reference Court has thus, rightly found the value of the acquired land of village Matta to which all the sale instances relate was not more than Rs.17,000/- for Nehri land. However, giving another amount of Rs.4000/- compensation stood enhanced into three categories i.e. for Nehri land it has been assessed @ Rs.17,000/-, for Barani @ Rs.14,000/- and for Gair Mumkin it has been enhanced to Rs.10,000/- per acre besides awarding statutory benefits in terms of the provisions of the Amended Act. Sh.Vinod Kumar Kataria, learned counsel for the appellants is at pains to persuade this Court to take into consideration the fact that out of the entire acquired land measuring 278 Kanals, land measuring 265 Kanals 1 Marla is Nehri, 7 Kanals 11 Marlas is Barani and only 5 Kanals 8 Marla is Gair Mumkin. Learned counsel has submitted that since only land measuring 12 Kanals and 19 Marlas is not Nehri, therefore, this may not be treated differently and compensation as assessed for the Nehri land be also awarded for the rest of the land measuring 12 Kanals 19 Marlas. Keeping in view the totality of circumstances, I do not find any merit in the present appeals and therefore, the same are hereby dismissed without any order as to costs. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 3.12.2008 Judge Meenu Refer to reporter - yes