1 HIGH COURT OF M.P. BENCH AT INDORE (Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice P.K. Jaiswal. First Appeal No.266/2001 Amru Bai W/o Gopalji v/s State of M.P. through Collector, Ujjain Land Acquisition Officer, Ujjain &] Gas Authority of India Limited. ***** First Appeal No.267/2001 Tejpal (deceased) through LRs (Ramesh chandra S/o Tejram & Shyama Bai D/o Tejram) v/s State of M.P. through Collector, Ujjain Land Acquisition Officer, Ujjain &] Gas Authority of India Limited. ***** First Appeal No.268/2001 Champa Bai (deceased) through LRs (Chetram @ Chenram S/o Nanulal, Kailash Chandra S/o Chenram & Suresh Chandra S/o Chenram) and Ramesh Chandra S/o Tejpal v/s State of M.P. through Collector, Ujjain Land Acquisition Officer, Ujjain &] Gas Authority of India Limited. ***** First Appeal No.271/2001 Narmada Bai Wd/o Pannalal Ashok Kumar S/o Pannalal & Chandrakant S/o Pannalal v/s State of M.P. through Collector, Ujjain Land Acquisition Officer, Ujjain &] Gas Authority of India Limited. ***** First Appeal No.469/2001 Nagusingh S/o Juzarsingh & Dhapu Bai @ Tejkunwar Bai W/o Juzarsingh v/s State of M.P. through Collector, Ujjain Land Acquisition Officer, Ujjain &] Gas Authority of India Limited. ***** 2 Shri M.D. Arya & Shri O.P. Arya, Advocates for the appellants. Shri S.D. Bohra, Government Advocate for the respondents 1 & 2. Shri D.S. Kale, Advocate for the respondent No.3. JUDGMENT ( .11.2011) Per P.K. Jaiswal, J. Because the question for consideration is common in First Appeals No. 266, 267, 268, 271 & 469 of 2001, therefore, this judgment shall govern disposal of all the aforementioned appeals. These appeals arising out of order dated 13.1.2001, passed by the 6th Additional District Judge, Ujjain in Land Acquisition Cases No. 56/1996, 59/1996, 58/1996, 57/1996 & 60/1996 respectively, whereby reference Court rejected the reference application and upheld the award passed by the Land Acquisition Officer on 16.10.1995 in Case No.4/A-82/94-95, by which the Land Acquisition Officer directed to pay the amount of compensation @ Rs.24,399/- per hectare to the land owners. 2. The facts of these five appeals are identical; however, for the sake of convenience the facts are being taken from First Appeal No.267/2001. 3. An area of 12.44 hectares of land of village Chikli, tehsil Tarana, district Ujjain was acquired for construction of gas platform. A preliminary notification under Section 4(1) read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (herein after referred to as 'the Act') was published on 8.4.1994. The declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 13.5.1994. A notice to the land owners was issued by the State Government under Section 9 of the Act on 28.5.1994. The Land Acquisition Officer had granted compensation @ Rs.24,399/- per hectare by its award dated 16.10.1995, passed in reference Case No.4/A-82/94-95 under Section 11 of the Act. The possession of the land was taken under Section 16 of the Act on 16.6.1994. 3 The land was acquired for construction of gas platform by the Gas Authority of India Limited. The appellants/ land owners dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Officer dated 16.10.1995 filed a reference application before the Land Acquisition Officer and a prayer was made that the matter be referred to the District & Sessions Judge, Ujjain. Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Officer forwarded the reference application to the Civil Court in proforma VII under Section 18 of the Act. 4. It is alleged in the reference application that the land is situated at village Tarana and is an irrigated land. The land owners have filed three sale-deeds dated 16.12.1991 (Ex.P/1), 1.12.1994 (Ex.P/2) & 21.12.94 (Ex.P/3). Ex. P/1 is the sale-deed in respect of an area 202 RA of un-irrigated land of village Tarana and as per the said sale-deed the valuation of the land in the year 1991 was Rs.69,307 per hectare. As per Ex.P/2 & Ex.P/ 3 sale-deeds the valuation of the land in the year 1994 was Rs.85,714/- and Rs.1,66,666/- per hectare respectively. Amru Bai in her statements has deposed that at the time of acquisition of un-irrigated land the value of the land was Rs.30,000/- per Bigha and value of irrigated land was Rs.60,000/- per Bigha. 5. The respondent/State filed their written reply before the trial Court and denied the averments made in the reference petition. In respect of market value of the land it is alleged that the sale- deeds (P/2 & P/3) are after the date of notification, which was made under Section 4(1) of the Act and, therefore, the average value assessed by the Land Acquisition Officer, on the basis of chart prepared by the Sub-Registrar vide Ex.D/1 is correct. 6. The State Government have examined two witnesses namely Ismile Khan (DW1) and Mohanlal (DW2). Mohanlal, the then Patwari of the village has filed a chart, which has been prepared on the basis of valuation of the sale-deeds for the year from 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1993-94 i.e., for the period from 1.4.1991 to 31.3.1994. The said chart has been prepared by the 4 Sub-Registrar of Tarana tehsil, the Land Acquisition Officer assessed the average valuation of the land @ Rs.24,399/- per hectare and awarded compensation accordingly. 7. The learned reference Court below considering the chart prepared by the Sub-Registrar upheld the order of the Land Acquisition Officer and rejected the reference petition. 8. As per Section 23 of the Act the market value of the acquired land has to be assessed on the date of publication of the notification under Section 4, sub-section (1) of the Act. The market value is to be determined according to the use of land as on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the land owners that the market value means what a willing purchaser would pay to a willing seller for the property, having regard to the advantages available to the land and the development activities which may be going on in the vicinity and potentiality of the land. He has further submitted that the market value may be ascertained on the basis of (i) opinion of experts, (ii) price of land within a reasonable time of bona fide transaction of value of purchase of land acquired or the land adjacent to the land acquired and possessing similar advantages; and; (iii) number of years purchased of the actual or immediately perspective parts of the land acquired. The Court is required to arrive as nearly as possible at the estimate of real market value by choosing one method or two or all methods. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/ State has submitted that the reference Court considering the chart, which was prepared on the basis of registry value of the agricultural land for the period between 1991-92 to 1993-94 and after considering the value of three years' period assessed the compensation @ Rs.24,399/- per hectare, which is just and proper and no case for enhancement of compensation, as prayed for by the appellants is made out and prays for dismissal 5 of all the appeals. 10. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 11. In assessing value for the purpose of compensation, the essential enquiry must be what is the property worth in the market, viewed not merely with reference to the uses to which it is at the time of application, but also with reference to the uses it may be developed in future. In the case of Administrator General of West Bengal v/s Collector Varanasi , AIR 1988 (2) SC 943 it has been held that even sale deeds subsequent to preliminary notification can be relied on if the prices be found to be stable during the period. 12. It has been held by the Apex Court in the case of Jawajee Nagnatham v/s Revenue Divisional Officer (1994) 4 SCC 595 that market value under Section 23 of the Act cannot be fixed on the basis of a basic valuation register maintained by the registering authority for collection of stamp duty. 13. It is settled law that one of the methods on which market value can be ascertained, is on the basis of comparable sale- deeds. For the purposes of the Land Acquisition Act the market value must be determined on the basis of sale-deeds of comparable lands. In the case in hand the Land Acquisition Officer had taken note of Ex. D/1, the chart prepared by the Sub- Registrar of tehsil Tarana, by which he gave the details of the sale-deeds executed during the period from 1.4.1991 to 31.3.1994 and fixed the compensation. The reference Court as well as the Land Acquisition Officer committed an error in not looking to the fact that preliminary notification for acquired land was issued on 8.4.1994 and, therefore, they have to assess the market value on the basis of sale-deeds of comparable lands for the period after 1.4.1994. As per sale-deeds filed by the land owners vide Exhibits-P/2 & P/3 the market value of the land in the year 1994 was between Rs.85,740/- per hectare to 6 Rs.1,66,666/- per hectare. As per sale-deed of 1991 (Ex.P/1), at that time the market value of the land was Rs.69,307/- per hectare. 14. It is a matter of common experience that the price of the land is soaring high due to development of the country and also due to exploitation of the population. If 15% per annum is accepted as the rate of increase of the price of the land then there would be 45% enhancement of the price of acquired land in dispute. The Apex Court in the case of Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Sahaswan, district Badaun v/s Vipin Kumar & another (2004) 2 SCC 283 has held that appreciation of the market value of the land at the rate of 15% for every subsequent year is reasonable. 15. The appellants (landowners) in order to prove the market value of the acquired land filed three sale-deeds of the land situated in village Chikli. Out of these sale-deeds one is of the year 1991 and other two are of the year 1994 i.e., subsequent to the date of Section 4 notification (8.4.1994) and, hence, none of these two sale-deeds of 1994 are of any assistance. So far as other sale-deed i.e., Ex.P/1 is concerned, in my opinion, the most material is Ex.P/1. This sale-deed dated 16.12.1991relates to the land situated in village Chikli. By this sale-deed the un- irrigated land ad-measuring 202 RA was sold for Rs.14,000/- i.e., Rs.69,307/- per hectare. This clearly works out the rate of land situated at village Chikli to be Rs.69,307/- per hectare. If 15% per annum is accepted as rate of increase of the price of the land then there would be more than 30% enhancement of the price of the acquired land in dispute. The enhancement of price @ Rs. 15% per annum for 844 days comes to Rs.24,039/- per hectare. Thus, after enhancement the rate of increase the price of the land comes to Rs.93,346/- per hectare. One can, therefore, safely conclude on the basis of the rate of this sale deed that the market value of the land situated at village Chikli in the year 1994 (on 8.4.1994) was around Rs. 93,350/- per hectare. It being the 7 settled principle of law relating to land acquisition cases that the claimants are entitled to claim the best price available amongst several sale-deeds provided all of the same nature. It is for this reason that in my opinion the value of the land can be safely determined on the basis of the sale deed dated 16.12.1991 (Ex.P/1). 16. I do not agree with the submission of the learned Government Advocate for the State when he urged that the sale- deed relied on by the appellant in relation to the land of village Chikli cannot be made basis for determining the rate of land. In my opinion the submission has no force. In the facts of this case, the enhancement that I have made i.e., Rs.93,350/- per hectare for the land in question is reasonable and it exhibit proper market value of the land at the time of its acquisition. 17. In view of the aforesaid discussions all these appeals are allowed. The impugned award of reference Court is partly modified and held that - (i) Landowners of 12.44 hectares are entitled to claim compensation for their lands, which were acquired under notification dated 8.4.1994, issued under Section 4 of the Act @ Rs.93,350/- per hectare instead of Rs.24,399/- per hectare; (ii) All the appellants are entitled to claim interest on solitium to be calculated on the basis of enhanced rate of land determined by the Court as per the rate mentioned in Section 28 of the Act from the date on which possession of the land was taken and 15%, if the case of the appellants falls in Proviso to Section 28 abid; (iii) Proportionate costs of the appeal to be awarded to each claimant/landowners i.e., appellants of these appeals to the extent of enhancement made by the Court in estimate; Counsel fees in each appeal Rs.3,000/-. A decree be accordingly drawn up in each appeal. (P.K. Jaiswal) JUDGE rcs*