RFA No.2543 of 1992 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** RFA No.2543 of 1992 Date of decision:04.11.2008 **** State of Haryana ….. Appellant(s) Vs. Jagdish Rai …. Respondent(s) **** CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN **** Present: Mr.H.S. Hooda, A.G., Haryana with Ms.Mamta Singhal Talwar, AAG, Haryana. **** RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J. This order shall dispose of 46 appeals i.e. RFA Nos.2543, 1238 to 1240, 1435 to 1441, 1531, 2544 to 2556, 2700, 2701 & 3091 of 1992, RFA Nos.1527 to 1543 & 3194 of 1993, as common questions of law and facts are involved therein. Land measuring 112 kanals and 12 marlas situated in Village Basti Bhiwan, Tehsil Fatehabad, District Hisar was notified vide notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 15.10.1987 followed by a notification of declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act dated 7.10.1988 for the public purpose namely, for establishing new fruit, vegetable and fodder market at village Basti Bhiwan. District Revenue Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, Haryana vide his award No.2 for the year 1988-89 dated 31.3.1989 determined the compensation of the acquired land @ Rs.2,50,000/- per acre besides awarding solatium and other benefits. RFA No.2543 of 1992 - 2 - Un-satisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, landowners filed objections under Section 18 of the Act for the purpose of enhancement of compensation. It was alleged that the land in dispute has potentiality of being used for residential and commercial purposes as it is situated by the side of National Highway No.10 and many residential colonies and commercial and industrial centres are situated in its proximity. It was alleged that petrol pump is quite adjacent to it and oil mill, Aggarwal Paper Board Factory and showroom of Eicher Tractor is situated opposite to it. It was also alleged that the land is situated within the Municipal Limits of Fatehabad. Therefore, claim of Rs.500/- per square yard was set up by the landowners. In the written statement, counsel for the State of Haryana has denied the averments of potentiality raised by the claimants on the ground that the land was tal and tibba at the time of acquisition and was used only for the purpose of agriculture. It was further alleged that the land in question is situated at the distance of 1 kms from the old bus-stand and 2 kms from the G.T. Road. Both the parties led evidence and after appreciation of the evidence, the reference Court vide its award dated 17.12.1991 re- determine the compensation @ Rs.2,65,000/- per acre vide awarding a marginal increase of Rs.15,000/- per acre only. Mr.H.S. Hooda, Advocate General, Haryana, assisted by Ms.Mamta Singla Talwar, AAG, Haryana, contended that the reference court had erred firstly for not relying upon the sale deeds Exs.R2 to R13 tendered the respondent/State and secondly the compensation has been assessed by the reference Court by applying guess work. RFA No.2543 of 1992 - 3 - No one has put in appearance on behalf of the claimants/landowners, M.C. Fatehabad and Chief Administrator, HSAMB. Sale deeds Ex.R2 to R13 relied upon by the State of Haryana are tabulated as under:- Exhibit Date of sale Area Kanal(s) Marla(s) Sale consideratio n (in Rs.) Price per acre (in Rs.) Ex.R2 26.11.86 7 07 82250/- 93877/- Ex.R3 16.1.87 6 17 79000/- 92263/- Ex.R4 16.1.87 1 03 13000/- 90435/- Ex.R5 - do - 8 00 92000/- 92000/- Ex.R6 - do - 8 00 - do - do Ex.R7 27.1.87 0 9 1/3 6500/- 111429/- Ex.R8 2.3.87 0 9 1/3 6500/- 111429/- Ex.R9 22.6.87 0 10 10000/- 16000/- Ex.R10 19.8.87 2 00 25000/- 100000/- Ex.R11 5.10.87 0 9 1/3 5000/- 85714/- Ex.R12 - do - - do - do - do - - do - Ex.R13 - do - - do - do - do - - do - Therefore, from the perusal of the above sale deeds would show that the minimum rate was Rs.85,714/- per acre whereas the maximum was Rs.1,11,429/- per acre which is less than the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, therefore, the sale deeds have been rightly ignored by the reference Court as the reference Court cannot award amount of compensation less than the award of the collector. Insofar as the determination of compensation @ Rs.2,65,000/- per acre is concerned, it has been contended by the counsel for the State that the reference Court had committed a palpable error while applying guess work for giving an enhancement of Rs.15,000/- per acre. The contention of the learned State counsel is not well founded because the reference Court, while RFA No.2543 of 1992 - 4 - enhancing a compensation of Rs.15,000/- per acre had taken into account potential value of the acquired land which was not considered by the Collector when he had assessed the compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- per acre. The relevant portion is para 19 of the judgment which is reproduced as under: - “On the basis of the statements of Dharampal Yadav PW1 Ashok Kumar PW5, Attam Singh Chaudhary PW6 and Pawan Kumar PW7 the learned counsel for the petitioners have argued that as auto market is situated just behind the acquired land and petrol pump and Aggarwal Straw Board Factory are situated just near the acquired land and there are also other factories situated on the National Highway No.10 towards Hisar side and that as the land in dispute is also situated within the municipal limits, it had potentiality of being used for residential, commercial and industrial purposes and, therefore, much more compensation should have been awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector. It is an admitted fact that even at the time of acquisition, the acquired land was situated within the municipal limits and petrol pump was/is situated just by its side and Aggarwal Straw Board Factory is situated in front after crossing National Highway No.10, it is also admitted by Pirthi Raj RW1 who is Halqa Patwari that there is proposal for truck union and auto market on the northern side of the acquired land but the same has not yet been set up and that Court complex, BDO’s office and residence of Dy.S.P. etc. are situated at a distance of 1 km from the acquired land towards Sirsa. In Raghunath Vs. State of Haryana 1986(2), All Indian Land Laws Reporter, 591, it is held that if residential building and other buildings are coming up near the acquired land then while RFA No.2543 of 1992 - 5 - determining market value, potentiality for acquired land being developed is also to be considered. Perusal of the award would show that while assessing the compensation, the Land Acquisition Collector only relied upon rates of land submitted by the Collector. As in the revenue record, the acquired land was only described as Tal and Tibba and was shown as agricultural land, it follows that while approving the rate of lands, the collector might not have taken into consideration the above potential value of the land in dispute. Therefore, taking into consideration all these circumstances and by applying some guess work, I feel that it will be most reasonable if compensation @ Rs.2,65,000/- per acre is given to the different land owners.” No other point has been raised by the counsel for the State/respondent(s). In view of the above discussion, I do not find any illegality in the order/award of the reference Court, whereby, a marginal increase of Rs.15,000/- per acre has been awarded on the basis of the potentiality of the acquired land which has been missed by the Collector in his award. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the present appeals filed by the State of Haryana as well as by M.C. Fatehabad, Chief Administrator, HSAMB and the claimants are hereby dismisses with no order as to costs. (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 04.11.2008 JUDGE vivek