RFA No.1450 of 1993 1 In the Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh. RFA No. 1450 of 1993 Decided on February 10,2009. Kanwal Singh --Appellant vs. The State of Haryana -- Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.R.K.Chhokar, Advocate,for the appellant. Mr.Rajiv Kawatra,Sr.DAG,Haryana,for the respondent. Rakesh Kumar Jain,J: (Oral) This judgment shall dispose of seven Regular First Appeals filed by the claimants bearing Nos.1450, 1451, 1452, 1453, 1454, 1455 and 1255 of 1993. Since identical question of law and facts are involved there in, therefore, these are being disposed of by a common judgment. However, the fact are being taken from RFA No. 1450 of 1993. Vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894,(for short,'the Act') published on 16.5.1988, followed by a notification of declaration issued under Section 6 of the RFA No.1450 of 1993 2 Act, dated 6.1.1989, land measuring 16 kanals, situated in the revenue estate of Barot, Tehsil Ganaur, District Sonepat, was acquired for public purpose, namely, for the construction of Bus Stand, Ganaur. The Land Acquisition Collector, (for short, the Collector), vide his award dated 04.5.1989, assessed the compensation of the acquired land @ Rs. one lac. per acre for the land measuring 5 kanals 12 marlas abutting G.T.Road and Rs.50,000/- per acre for land measuring 10 kanals 3 marlas situated on its back side. Provoked by the inadequacy of value determined of their land by the Collector, the claimants filed objections under Section 18 of the Act and claimed compensation @ Rs.600 to Rs.1000 per square yard for their acquired land on the ground that it had great potentiality for being developed for commercial, industrial and residential purposes having been situated on the G.T.Road Ganaur where industrial establishments, commercial centres, shopping complex and marketing centres have come up. It is also claimed that there are rice shellers and cold storage adjacent to the acquired land besides a petrol pump situated just opposite it. The reference was contested by the respondent-State. In the reply, it was alleged that just and adequate compensation has already been awarded to the claimants keeping in view all the relevant factors. It was found that the acquired land had no potential as there were no industries near it as alleged nor there is any residential colony. It was also denied that there was any petrol pump RFA No.1450 of 1993 3 or any shop near the site, however, it was admitted that there were rice sheller and cold storage near the acquired land. In order to substantiate their respective pleas, both the parties led their oral as well as documentary evidence. The claimants relied upon the following sale deeds:- Sr. No. Date of Sale Area Sold (in sq. yards) Total Price (in Rs.) Price per sq. yard (in Rs.) 1 Ex.P1.3/02/86 210 23000/- 110/- 2 Ex.P2.3.2.1986 120 12000/- 100/- 3 Ex.P3.3.2.1986 160 16000/- 100/- 4 Ex.P4.12.2.1986 80 8000/- 100/- 5 Ex.P5.14.2.86/19.3.1986 80 8000/- 100/- 6 Ex.P6.14.2.86/19.3.1986 80 8000/- 100/- 7 Ex.P7.15.5.1986 80 8000/- 100/- 8 Ex.P8.15.5.1986 96 10,000/- 104 9 Ex.P9. 15.5.1986 200 20,000/- 100/- 10 Ex.P10.3.12./4.12.86 133 13,000/- 100/- 11 Ex.P11.26.11.1986 80 8000/- 100/- 12 Ex.P12. 26.11.1986 160 16,000/- 100/- 13 Ex.P13.20.5.1987 25 5000/- 200/- 14 Ex.P14.26.5.1987 150 15,000/- 100/- 15 Ex.P15.13.1.1987 152 21,000/- 160/- 16 Ex.P16.7.12.1987 200 30,000/- 150/- 17 Ex.P17.20.11.1990 90 22,000/- 250/- 18 Ex.P18.4.12.1990 16 175,000/- 1094/- 19 Ex.P19.11.12.1990 46 70,000/- 1522/- 20 Ex.P20.11.12.1990 100 1,60,000/- 1600/- 21 Ex.P21.12.12.1990 150 50,000/- 333/- 22 Ex.P22.28.12.1990 196 68,000/- 350/- 23 Ex.P23.28.7.1987 200 20,000/- 100/- RFA No.1450 of 1993 4 On the other hand, the respondent-State has relied upon the following sale deeds:- Sr. No. Date of Sale Area Sold (in sq. yards) Total Price (in Rs.) Price per sq. yard (in Rs.) R1 22.2.88 6/2/3M Rs.12000/- Rs.60/- R2 14.1.88 8M Rs.6500/- Rs.27/- R-III 15.1.88 8M Rs.8000/- Rs.30/- R-4 15.1.88 201½/ Rs.7000/- Rs 35/- Sq.yards R-6 11.1.88 13 M Rs.11500/ - Rs.21/- R-7 11.1.88 9 M Rs.8500/- Rs.31/- R-8 20.11.87 16 ½ Rs.20000/- Rs.40/- Sq.Yds. R-9 28.7.87 6 ½ M Rs.20000/- Rs.100/- R-10 12.11.87 16 ½.M Rs.15000/- Rs.30/- R-11 10.2.88 1 K4 M Rs.25000/- Rs.34/- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- The learned reference Court found the sale deeds Ex.P-23 and Ex. R-9 of the same date 28.7.1987 fetching market value of Rs.100/- per square yard, but keeping in view the fact that the said sale instances pertain to small pieces of land, applied a cut of 50% and awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 50/- per square yard. Mr.R.K.Chhokar, learned counsel for the appellants has drawn the attention of this Court to the scaled site plan Ex.P-24 in which the acquired land has been marked with letters A.B.C.D and is shown in pink colour, whereas all the sale instances are shown in green colour. Out of 18 sale instances, three sale instances, namely item Nos.3,7 and8 appearing in the detail of the sale deeds on the site plan Ex.P-24 are found to be within the acquired land itself. Thus, RFA No.1450 of 1993 5 it is argued that all the three sale instances which form part of the acquired land have the same features, therefore, average of these three sale deeds should be taken. It is further submitted that the three sale deeds would be Exs. P-10, P-14 and P-16. The total value of the three instances would be Rs. 347.50 paise which on division by three would come to Rs.115.83 paise which is rounded off to Rs. 116/-. It is further argued that the learned reference Court has committed an error while applying a cut of 50% on the ground that the sale instances pertain to small pieces of land vis-a-vis a large chunk of land that has been acquired. In this regard, it has been submitted that the acquired land is only 16 killas and cannot be termed a large chunk of land as it is only two acres, therefore, cut should be applied not more than 25%. As against this, learned State Counsel has argued that the Court below has rightly applied a cut of 50% as the sale instances are very small pieces of land of 100 square yards to 150 square yards as against 16 killas of acquired land. He, however,could not dispute that the sale instances referred by the learned counsel for the appellants Exs. P-10, P-14 and P-16 form part and parcel of the acquired land. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance. It is now well settled that the sale instance which forms part and parcel of the acquired land is the best guiding factor for the RFA No.1450 of 1993 6 Court to decide as to what was the value of the acquired land at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. In the present case, there are three sale deeds from the acquired land which forming its part and parcel and are in close proximity of time of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act, therefore, I am of the view that average of all the three sale instances have to be taken into consideration which comes to Rs.347.50 which on division by three comes to Rs.115.83 and is rounded off as Rs.116/- per acre. Once the value has been determined for the land, the question arises as to what cut should be applied. In my view, it would be appropriate to apply a cut of 25% to the value derived from all the three sale deeds because the land in question is within the municipal limits of Gharaunda which cannot be called an acquisition of big chunk of land. therefore, a cut of 25% towards development charges is just and appropriate. Thus, in my view, the value which has come out of this acquisition at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act is Rs.87/- per square yard instead of Rs. 50/-. The landowners/claimants shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs.37/- per square yard from the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act with statutory benefits as per the provisions of the amended Act and costs of these appeals. February 10,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge