R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 [1] In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision : 08 .9.2008 1. R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 (O&M) Lt. Col. S.C. Duggal and others ... Appellants vs State of Haryana and another ... Respondents 2. R. F. A. No. 1084 of 1992 (O&M) Dilbag Singh ..... Appellant vs State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents 3. R. F. A. No. 1258 of 1992 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ... Appellants vs Dilbag Singh ..... Respondent 4. R. F. A. No. 1259 of 1992 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ... Appellants vs Ravinder Pal Singh and others ..... Respondents 5. R. F. A. No. 1260 of 1992 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ... Appellants vs Raj Kumar Duggal and others ..... Respondents 6. R. F. A. No. 1261 of 1992 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ... Appellants vs Tilak Raj Duggal ..... Respondent 7. R. F. A. No. 1262 of 1992 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ... Appellants vs Mam Raj ..... Respondent R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 [2] 8. R. F. A. No. 1263 of 1992 (O&M) State of Haryana and another ... Appellants vs Sham Kishore and others ..... Respondents 9. R. F. A. No. 1382 of 1992 (O&M) Sham Kishore and others ..... Appellants vs State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents 10. R. F. A. No. 1383 of 1992 (O&M) Ravinder Pal Singh and others ..... Appellants vs State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents 11. R. F. A. No. 3548 of 1993 (O&M) Mam Raj ..... Appellant vs State of Haryana and another ..... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. M. L. Sharma, Advocate for the appellants in R.F.A. Nos. 1084, 1382 and 1383 of 1992,3548 of 1993 and for the respondents in R.F.A. Nos. 1258, 1259, 1261, 1262 and 1263 of 1992. Mr. H.S. Hooda, Advocate General, Haryana with Mr. Rajiv Kawatra, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the appellants in R.F.A. Nos. 1258, 1259, 1260, 1261, 1262 and 1263 of 1992. Mr. J.R. Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Lalit Sharma and Mr. Harkesh Manuja, Advocates for the appellants in R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 and for the respondents in R.F.A. No.1260 of 1992. ... Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of Regular First Appeals bearing Nos. 1084, 1242, 1382, 1383 of 1992 and 3548 of 1993, filed by the landowners for further enhancement of compensation and R.F.A. Nos. 1258, 1259, 1260, 1261, 1262, 1263 of 1992, filed by the State for reduction in the compensation, as common questions of law and fact are involved. The R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 [3] facts have been extracted from R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 21.4.1987 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), land measuring 27.47 acres was acquired for development and utilization of the land for residential and commercial area for Urban Estate, Shahabad, District Kurukshetra, which was followed by notification under Section 6 of the Act on 20.4.1988. The award was given by the Land acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') on 12.4.1990 determining the value of the land at Rs. 73,600/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award, the landowners filed objections which were referred for consideration by the learned Court below. Appreciating the material placed on record by the parties, the learned Court below vide award dated 29.11.1991 determined the value of the acquired land at Rs. 4,07,600/- per acre. Still aggrieved, the land owners are in appeal before this Court for further enhancement of the compensation, whereas the State has filed appeals for reduction of the amount of compensation. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that keeping in view the location of the land, which is situated on Shahabad-Ladwa road starting from G.T. Road, having bright future commercial potential, the compensation assessed by the learned Court below is quite meager. In fact, another piece of land had already been acquired by the State for development as Urban Estate and the land under acquisition in the present case is situated more close to the G.T. Road as compared to the land already acquired. The submission is that the learned Court below had failed to consider the material placed on record by the landowners. It had merely relied upon an earlier award of the Court for acquisition of the land before the acquisition of the land in the present case and granted 12% annual increase thereon. In fact, there were sale instances available on record during the period from first acquisition in 1982 till the present acquisition on 21.4.1987. The learned Court below was required to consider this material for the purpose of determination of fair value of the acquired land. The formula of annual increase could be applied only in the absence of evidence on record. A reference has been made to Ex. P.3 to P.8 showing the value of the transactions ranging from Rs. 3,60,000/- to Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre. Referring to the evidence in the form of Ex. P.3 to P.8, the R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 [4] submission is that average sale price in all these transactions comes to Rs. 6,06,666.33 per acre and if a cut of even 20% is imposed, the value of the acquired land will come to Rs. 4,85,334/- per acre. If the highest of the transaction is taken into consideration at Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre and a cut of even 50% is imposed, the market value of the land will come out to Rs. 6,00,000/- per acre. Accordingly, the determination of compensation by the Court below is not in conformity with law. On the other hand, learned Advocate General submitted that the transactions, as are shown by the landowners, do not depict the correct state of affairs for the reason that these are for small plots of land purchased for commercial purposes abutting the main road. The rate, at which these transactions took place, cannot possibly be considered for the purpose of determination of fair value for the acquisition of a large chunk of land. He further submitted that the learned Court below was quite generous in enhancing the amount of compensation for the acquired land from Rs. 73,600/- to Rs. 4,07,600/- per acre which, in fact, call for reduction and not revision. Referring to the sale transactions in detail, as produced by the landowners, he submitted that barring one isolated transaction in the form of sale deed Ex. P.4 dated 26.3.1987 for six marlas of land, which was sold for Rs. 45,000/-, the average price thereof comes to Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre. The other transactions are ranging from Rs. 3,60,000/- per acre to Rs. 6,40,000/- per acre and the area involved is ranging from 7 marlas to 1 kanal 4 marlas. Elaborating further, he submitted that in sale deed (Ex. P.3) dated 24.6.1982, the area is merely one kanal and average sale price is Rs. 3,50,000/- per acre. In sale deed (Ex.P.5) dated 26.3.1987, the area is 10 marlas and average price is Rs. 4,80,000/- per acre. In sale deed (Ex. P.6) dated 7.8.1986, again for an area of 10 marlas, the average sale consideration is Rs. 6,40,000/- per acre. In sale deed (Ex.P. 7) dated 22.8.1985, the area is 1 kanal 4 marlas and the average price per acre is Rs. 4,00,000/- and in sale deed (Ex. P.8) dated 12.2.1987, for 7 marlas of land the average sale consideration comes to Rs. 5,50,000/- per acre. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 [5] The learned Court below, while determining the value of the land on the date of acquisition, relied upon an earlier award of the Court below for the acquisition made in 1982, where the value of the land was assessed at Rs. 2,66,400/- per acre. Giving an annual increase of 12% for the intervening period, the value was determined at Rs. 4,07,600/- per acre. The award given by the learned Court below in the case of acquisition vide notification dated 4.8.1988 was not relied upon, being the subsequent in time. To appreciate the contentions of the parties, it would be appropriate to refer to the evidence led. The sale deeds, as are relied upon by the landowners and discussed in the award of the Court below, are tabulated as under: “Sr. No. Exh. Date of sale Area sold Amount Approximate Approximate Nos. deed of sale price per price per yard acre 1. P3 24.6.1982 1K0M Rs. 45,000/- 3,60,000/- 74.38 2. P4 26.3.1987 0K6M Rs. 45,000/- 12,00,000/- 274.93 3. P5 26.3.1987 0K10M Rs. 30,000/- 4,80,000/- 99.17 4. P6 7.8.1986 0K10M Rs. 40,000/- 6,40,000/- 132.23 5. P7 22.8.1985 1K4M Rs. 60,000/- 4,00,000/- 82.70 6. P8 12.2.1987 0K7M Rs. 24,500/- 5,60,000/- 115.85” A perusal of the above referred evidence shows that the transactions are for very small pieces of plots, reliance on which for determination of the value of large chunk of land will not be a safe measure. As against this, the State relied upon Ex. R.1 to R.3 showing the market value of the land in the vicinity as under: “Sr. No. Exh. Date of sale Area sold Amount Approximate Approximate Nos. deed of sale price per price per yard acre 1. R1 30.1.1986 3K13M Rs.30,000/- 65,775.42 13.58 2. R2 24.10.1985 0K19M Rs. 6,000/- 50,526.31 10.43 3. R3 18.6.1986 0K13M Rs. 4,875/- 60,000.00 12.39” The value, referred to as such, cannot be relied upon as the same is below the award of the Collector. The land, as forming part of transaction in sale deed (Ex. R.1) is located on G.T. Road, though not directly on the main road. R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 [6] A perusal of site plan (Ex. P.1) shows that the land situated in sale deed (Ex.P.3) is situated in a series of shops constructed on main Shahabad-Ladwa road quite close to G.T. Road. The transaction was entered into on 24.6.1982 for an area of 1 kanal for Rs. 45,000/-, the value of which per acre comes to Rs. 3,60,000/-. A part of this was re-sold on 26.3.1987, where six marlas of land was sold for Rs. 45,000/-, which comes out to Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre. The area in question is located ahead of the land under acquisition towards G.T. Road. This being a transaction for a very small piece of land cannot possibly be relied upon for the purpose of determination of the value of a large chunk of 27.47 acres of land. As far as sale deed (Ex. P.5) is concerned, the same is for an area of 10 marlas for Rs. 30,000/-, which was registered on 26.3.1987. The value comes out to Rs. 4,80,000/- per acre. The location is just on G.T. Road. Similar is the position with regard to sale deeds (Ex.P. 6 and P.7) which are also in the form of plots measuring 10 marlas and 1 kanal and 4 marlas which are situated on the main road leading from G.T. Road Shahabad to Ladwa. The transactions, as are sought to be relied upon by the landowners in the present case, cannot be said to be of the land which can simply be relied upon for the purpose of determination of the fair value of the land in the present case. It was for this reason that the learned Court below adopted a safe method of granting 12% annual increase on the basis of the award given for the acquired land vide notification issued in 1982. Even otherwise, a perusal of the sale transactions shows that on the main G.T. Road, a small plot of 10 marlas was sold for Rs. 30,000/- making it to Rs. 4,80,000/- per acre, whereas on the road leading from G.T. Road Shahabad to Ladwa, a plot measuring 6 marlas was sold for Rs. 45,000/- on the same date (Ex. P.4) making it to Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre. In fact, this depends on the requirement of a person at which place he would like to buy a small piece of land which may be most suited to him and for which he may be ready to part with even higher price. Such type of isolated transaction showing exhorbitant price having no co-relation with the other transaction entered into on the day, cannot possibly be relied upon for the purpose of determination of compensation for a large chunk of land. R.F.A. No. 1242 of 1992 [7] If the average of four other transactions relied upon by the landowners in the form of Ex. P.5 to P.8 are taken together, the same comes to Rs. 5,20,000/- per acre (this is after deleting Ex. P.3 and P.4 which is pertaining to the same portion of land showing the transactions in 1982 and 1987). Even if a cut of 25% only is imposed out of this average of Rs. 5,20,000/- per acre, the price per acre would come to Rs. 3,90,000/-, which is less than the value determined by the learned Court below which is Rs. 4,07,600/- per acre. However, as by applying a different formula, which is also a recognised method, the amount of compensation payable to the landowners has been assessed by the learned Court below, I do not propose to interfere with the same. Accordingly, the award of the learned Court below is upheld. The appeals filed by the landowners as well as the State are dismissed. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge September 08,2008