RFA No.4525 of 2001 -1 - IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.4525 of 2001 Date of Decision: 16.3.2009 Thuru Ram ..Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ..Respondents. CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present : Mr.M.L.Sarin, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Hemant Sarin, Advocate & Mr.R.S.Manhas, Advocate for the appellants. Mr.Navdeep Sukhna, AAG Punjab for the respondents. RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, (ORAL) By this common judgment, 56 Regular First Appeals bearing Nos.4304, 3527, 5091, 3529 to 3533, 3535 to 3540, 4258 to 4286, 4297, 4301 to 4303, 4305, 4525 to 4531 and 3528 of 2001 filed by claimants against the impugned award of the Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur dated 31.3.2001 are being disposed of together as identical question of law and facts are involved therein. However, the facts are being extracted from RFA No.4525 of 2001 titled as Thuru Ram Vs. State of Punjab and others. Vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short `the Act') dated 12.1.1990, land measuring 23.83 acres in villages Jugial and Rajpura was acquired at the public expense, for public purpose, namely, for construction of Shahpur Kandi Hydel Channel from point A to A-1 for the Shahpur Kandi Barrage Project. On the same date, another notification was issued under Section 4 of the Act RFA No.4525 of 2001 -2 - and land measuring 23.94 acres of village Rajpura was acquired for construction of Shahpur Kandi Hydel Channel from point A1 to A2 for the Shahpur Kandi Barrage Project. A follow up notification for both the acquisitions was issued under Section 6 of the Act on 28.2.1990. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short `the Collector') vide his award dated 29.5.1991 pertaining to the acquisition of land measuring 23.83 acres, awarded the following rates: Village Rajpura: Nehri/Chahi Rs.36,000/- per acre Barani I Rs.30,000/- per acre Barani II Rs.24,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin/Rasta Rs.24,000/- per acre Village Jugial: Barani II Rs.24,000/- per acre In respect of acquisition of 23.94 acres of land, the Collector vide his award dated 26.9.1991 awarded the following rates for village Rajpura: Nehri/Chahi Rs.36,000/- per acre Barani I Rs.30,000/- per acre Barani II Rs.24,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin/Talab Rs.4000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Abadi Rs.40,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Rasta Rs.24,000/- per acre The land owners were not satisfied with the award of the Collector, therefore, they filed Objections under Section 18 of the Act and claimed Rs.6,000/- per marla. On 27.3.1992, 19 references pertaining to the acquisition of the year 1990, were decided by the Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur and the market value was assessed @ Rs.1,000/- per RFA No.4525 of 2001 -3 - marla i.e. Rs.1,60,000/- per acre after holding that the land was having potential value being adjoining to village Jugial Town which was having all the civic amenities. The State of Punjab challenged the said award of Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur dated 27.3.1992 by way of appeal in lead case bearing RFA No.1927 of 1992 titled as Punjab State and others Vs. Thuru Ram. The land owners in those appeals also filed Cross Objections. In the meantime, compensation that was awarded @ Rs.1000/- per marla was paid to the land owners while the aforesaid appeals for the acquisition of the year 1990, were pending before the Reference Court. After remand, the State of Punjab issued another notification under Section 4 of the Act on 1.2.1993 and published it on 3.2.1993 to acquire 333.94 acres of land in villages Haroor, Barkula and Rajpura for the public purpose, namely, for construction of Shahpur Kandi Hydel Channel including Power House which was followed by a notification of declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act dated 17.9.1993. The Collector vide his award dated 21.12.1995 awarded the following compensation for the land of Villages Rajpura, Haroor and Barkula. Village Rajpura Chahi and Nehri Rs.36,000/- per acre Barani I Rs.30,000/- per acre Barani II Rs.28,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Rs.10,000/- per acre Village Haroor Barani I Rs.30,000/- per acre Barani II Rs.28,000/- per acre Bagicha I Rs.32,000/- per acre RFA No.4525 of 2001 -4 - Bagicha II Rs.30,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Rs.10,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Abadi Rs.30,000/- per acre Village Barkula Nehri Rs.36,000/- per acre Barani II Rs.28,000/- per acre Bagicha B II Rs.30,000/- per acre Gair Mumkin Rs.10,000/- per acre Vide order dated 1.10.1997, Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur determined the market value of the land acquired in acquisition of the year 1993 @ Rs.1100/- per marla i.e. Rs.1,76,000/- per acre. This award was challenged both by the land owners as well as State of Punjab before this Court. The appeal arising out of the acquisition of the year 1990, namely, RFA No.1927 of 1992 was allowed. Connected appeals were allowed by this Court vide order dated 1.4.1999 and judgment dated 27.3.1992 was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the learned Reference Court, inter alia, on the ground that vendor and vendee of the sale transactions have not been produced nor there was enough evidence to show potentiality. It is pertinent to mention here that along with the RFA arising out of the acquisition of the year 1990, the appeals arising out of the acquisition of the year 1993 were also remanded back. After the remand, the parties led their respective evidence inasmuch as in order to prove the sale deeds, vendors and vendees were produced. The claimants relied upon sale deeds, which are reproduced as under : “Sr. Sale Deed/dates Vendor Vendee Area Amount No. 1. Ex.A2/13.11.99 Surjit Tarsem lal 10 Marla 35,000/- RFA No.4525 of 2001 -5 - 2. Ex.A3/8.3.90 Bhau Smt.Darshna 4 M 4,000/- Kumari 3. Ex.A4/8.2.91 Shanti Sarup Ajit Lal 4 M 60,000/- 4. Ex.A5/12.7.89 Bachittar Balak Ram 10 M 8,000/- 5. Ex.A6/29.1.91 Harbans Lal Buta Mal 16 Kanal 1,20,000/- 6. Ex.A7/4.1.91 Bhagwan Dass Bhupinder 4 Marla 3,000/- 7. Ex.A8/10.4.89 Gobind Rai Rajinder Kumar 2 Marla 5,000/- 8. Ex.A9/31.5.89 Dhian Chand Ved Parkash 10 Marla 15,000/- 9. Ex.A10/14.12.89 Akesh Kumar Shanti Sarup 2 Marla 10,000/- 10. Ex.A11/1.12.89 Bishambar Dass Prithvi Raj 704 Sq.Ft. 12,000/- 11. Ex.A12/13.9.89 Faqir Amarjit Singh 3 M 5 S. 20,000/- 12. Ex.A13/20.6.89 Shanker Santosh Kumari 1.5 Marla 6,000/- 13. Ex.A14/20.6.89 Shanker Sher Singh 2 Marla 8,000/- 14. Ex.A15/19.1.90 Kewal Krishan Ram Krishan 176 Sq.Ft 4,000/- 15. Ex.A2/30.9.92 Dina Nath Bal Krishan 9 Marla 27,000/- 16. Ex.A3/30.9.92 Dina Nath Ravinder Kumar 18 Marla 54,000/-” As against this, respondent-State of Punjab also produced sale deeds Ex.R2 to Ex.R4. The learned Reference Court observed that the claimants have been able to prove sale instances Ex.A4, Ex.A8, Ex.A9, Ex.A10, Ex.A13 and Ex.A14 subsequent to remand by examining vendors and vendees but they failed to prove the contiguity of the acquired land with the nearest township or commercial potential of this land. Thus taking into consideration the aforesaid sale deeds Ex.A4, Ex.A8, Ex.A9, Ex.A10, Ex.A13 and Ex.A14, average price of Chahi/Nehri land @ Rs.57,000/- per acre was arrived at to which a cut of 25% was applied and the compensation was awarded as under: RFA No.4525 of 2001 -6 - Sr.No. Village Type of land Compensation in Rs.per acre 1. Rajpura (1) Nehri/Chahi Rs.45,000/- per acre (2) Barani-I Rs.38,000/- per acre (3) Barani-II Rs.29,000/- per acre (4) Gair Mumkin/Rasta Rs.29,000/- per acre 2. Jugial (1) Barani-II Rs.29,000/- per acre However, no reference has been made in respect of the land of villages Haroor, Barkula and Rajpura which was subject matter of acquisition of the year 1993. Aggrieved against the impugned order, the claimants have come up in appeal. The appeals were admitted. Later on, an application was filed for stay on the basis of which restitution of the amount of compensation was stayed in view of order passed in RFA No.3529 of 2001 titled as Harbans Singh Versus State of Punjab. During the pendency of the appeal, an application bearing CM No.8211 of 2001 was filed in RFA No.4525 of 2001 in order to place on record two plans pertaining to acquisition of the year 1993. Notice in the application was issued and the respondent-State filed reply to the application on 18.8.2008. Thus, the application is also being considered with the main case. Sh.M.L.Sarin, learned Senior counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended that even if the observation of the learned Reference Court is to be taken as it is that sale deeds Ex.A4, Ex.A8, Ex.A9, Ex.A10, Ex.A13 and Ex.A14 are to be considered even then the total value per marla comes to Rs.1781.75 to which the claimants are entitled. It is also argued that since the land has been acquired for the purpose of barrage project, RFA No.4525 of 2001 -7 - therefore, application for cut is uncalled for. He also contends that potential value of the acquired land is also apparent from the site plan as it is near Shahpur Kandi township. As against this, Sh.Navdeep Sukhna, AAG Punjab appearing for the respondents has argued that insofar as the rate of Rs.1718.75 per marla as submitted by the learned Senior counsel for the appellant is concerned, it is correct even according to his own calculation. The calculation which has been supplied to the Court by the State counsel, is reproduced as under : Sr.No. Sale deed No./Date Area (K - M) Amount (Rs.) 1. Ex.A8/10.4.1989 0 K - 2 M 5,000/- 2. Ex.A9/21.5.1989 0 K - 10 M 15,000/- 3. Ex.A13/20.6.1989 0 K - 1.5 M 6,000/- 4. Ex.A14/20.6.1989 0 K - 2 M 8,000/- 5. Ex.A10/20.6.1989 0 K - 1.5 M 6,000/- 6. Ex.A4/4.7.1989 0 K - 15 M 15,000/- Total 0 K - 32 M 55,000/- The average amount comes to Rs.1718.75 per marla. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that though the calculation made by the Reference Court appears to be incorrect but cut of 25% should be applied as sale deeds, which have been relied upon by the claimants, are pertaining to very small piece of land whereas the total acquired land is running into 47.77 acres. I have heard both the counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance. No doubt that all the sale deeds Ex.A8, Ex.A9, Ex.A10, Ex.A13 RFA No.4525 of 2001 -8 - and Ex.A14 are prior to the date of acquisition dated 12.1.1990 and sale deed Ex.A4 is in fact dated 8.2.91 which is though after the date of notification issued under Section 4 of the Act but all the sale deeds have been duly proved after the remand by producing vendors and vendees. Therefore, there is no doubt about the genuineness of all the sale deeds. Now considering the aforesaid sale deeds, I am of the view that rate per marla on an average comes to Rs.1718.75. Now the question is whether a cut of 25% should have been applied or not. Admittedly, total acquired land of the acquisition of the year 1990 is 47.77 acres against which sale deeds which have been put up by the claimants are not even of a kanal but are running into marlas. Thus, keeping in view the small size of the sale deeds, I deem it appropriate to apply 25% cut as a result of which the value comes out to be @ Rs.1289/- per marla which is rounded off @ Rs.1290/- per marla. Thus, value of land measuring 23.83 acres acquired vide notification dated 12.1.1990 in villages Jugial and Rajpura for construction of Shahpur Kandi Hydel Channel from point A to A-1 and for the acquisition of land measuring 23.94 acres in village Rajpura for construction of Shahpur Kandi Hydel Channel from point A-1 to A-2 for the Shahpur Kandi Barrage Project, value of the acquired land would be Rs.1290/- per marla. Sh.M.L.Sarin, learned Sr.Counsel for the appellant has further argued that subsequent notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 4.2.1993 by which 333.94 acres of land of villages Haroor, Barkula and Rajpura was acquired for the same purpose, namely, for construction of Shahpur Kandi Hydel Channel. It is submitted that since the Court has got the value of the acquisition of land of villages Jugial and Rajpura of the acquisition dated 12.1.1990, therefore, the claimants whose land has been RFA No.4525 of 2001 -9 - acquired on 1.12.1993 after a period of practically three years, should also be granted another hike in the price of land to the tune of 12% per annum which comes to Rs.464/-. In order to claim 12% increase per annum, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon Om Parkash (dead) by LRs Vs. Union of India and others 2004(3) PLR 200 (SC); 2006 PLR 559 (DB) AND Tara Devi Vs. State of Haryana and another 2005 (3) All India Land Laws Reporter 449. Keeping in view the fact that the matter has been remanded by this Court, the claimants are in the second round of litigation and the acquisition is of land of the years 1990 and 1993, I deem it appropriate to award 12% increase per year on the value arrived at for the acquisition of the year 1990 @ Rs.1290/- per marla. In this manner, the appellants whose land was acquired vide notification issued on 1.2.1993, should get additional sum of Rs.464/- per marla which comes to Rs.1754/- per marla. In view of the above discussion, the present appeals are allowed and the impugned order of the Reference Court is set aside. The claimants whose land was acquired in the year 1990, shall get @ Rs.1290/- per marla and the claimants whose land was acquired in the year 1993, shall get Rs.1754/- per marla with all statutory benefits in terms of the provisions of the Amended Act with costs of the appeals. (Rakesh Kumar Jain) 16.3.2009 Judge Meenu