R.F.A. No. 1976 of 1986 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH R.F.A. No. 1976 of 1986 Date of decision: September 08 , 2008 Hirdey Ram .. Appellant v. State of Haryana .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: None for the appellant. Mr. Navneet Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent. Rajesh Bindal J. The land owner is before this Court against award dated 1.3.1986 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Karnal, whereby the learned Court below awarded Rs. 33,700/- per acre for the acquired land, as against Rs. 18,000/- per acre awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector'). Briefly, the facts are that land measuring 55 kanals 15 marlas in Village Goli, Hadbast No. 32, Tehsil Assandh, District Karnal was acquired under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') for free allotment of residential plots to landless/ helpleess Harijans, members of Backward and economically weaker persons. It was followed by notification issued under Section 6 of the Act on 9.3.1984. The Collector gave award of Rs. 18,000/- per acre. Aggrieved against the same, the appellant filed objections which were referred to the learned Additional District Judge, where keeping in view the material placed on record by the parties, he awarded Rs. 33,700/- per acre. A perusal of the award shows that the land owner in the present case produced Ex. P.2 and P.3 in the form of copies of mutations and the only sale deed produced on record was in the form of Ex. P.6. The State also, on the other hand, merely produced copies of mutations. It is settled that mutations cannot be considered for the purpose of determination of fair value of land on the date of acquisition. R.F.A. No. 1976 of 1986 [2] Out of the entire evidence what remained for consideration by the learned Court below was the sale deed Ex. P.6. The same is for land measuring 15 marlas sold for a sum of Rs. 6,500/-. The sale deed was executed on 24.11.1981 forming part of Khasra Nos. 226 and 228. The value thereof was calculated at Rs. 50,300/- per acre. Applying reasonable cut for the sale instance being for a smaller piece of plot and for the fact that the sale transaction related to a bara, whereas the acquired land was purely agricultural, the amount of compensation was arrived at Rs. 33,700/- per acre. I have perused the site plan (Ex. P.4) on record which shows the acquired land as well as the site where the plot forming part of sale deed (Ex. P.6) is located. A perusal of the site plan shows that the acquired land is situated on one side of a johar near phirni of the village and other agricultural land, whereas the plot forming part of sale deed (Ex. P.6) is situated on the metalled approach road (phirni), just opposite the abadi of the village which clearly makes out that the consideration paid for sale of this small plot of land situated on the road cannot possibly be made basis for assessment of compensation payable for a bigger plot of land situated on the bank of johar near the village. The learned Court below has reasonably scaled down the price keeping in view size and location of the plot sold vide Ex. P.6. However, keeping in view the fact that sale deed (Ex.P.6) is dated 24.11.1981 and the acquisition of land was made vide notification dated 2/3.11.1983, nearly two years thereafter, 10% increase on the value of the land determined by the Court below would be reasonable on that account. Accordingly, an additional sum of Rs. 3,300/- per acre shall be payable to the land owner/ appellant over and above Rs. 33,700/- per acre determined by the learned Court below. The appellant shall be entitled to compensation @ 37,000/- per acre. He shall also be entitled to all other statutory benefits admissible to him under the Act. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed with costs throughout. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge September 08, 2008 mk