RFA No. 3741 of 2009 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 3741 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.3.2011 State of Haryana and others ...Appellants vs Man Singh and others ...Respondents Coram : Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana and Mr. Anjum Ahmed, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Kuldip Singh, Mr. Anil Malik, Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Mr. Ashwani K. Bura, and Mr. S. K. Chauhan, Advocate for Mr. Raj Mohan Singh, Advocate, for the landowners. Rajesh Bindal, J. This order shall dispose of appeals bearing RFA Nos. 3741 to 3761, 3835, 3846 to 3849, 3970, 3995, 4824, 4833, 5949 to 5953 of 2009, 295 to 301, 542, 545, 546, 3493 and 3836 of 2010, as common questions of law and facts are involved in these appeals. The State of Haryana is seeking reduction of compensation awarded to the landowners for the acquired land, whereas the landowners are seeking enhancement thereof. The bunch of appeals pertain to the valuation of land acquired for construction of BML Hansi Branch-Butana Branch Multipurpose Link Channel from RD 91 to 156 off taking from RD 340300- L Bhakra Main Line for which notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') was issued by the State of Haryana on 23.8.2005. The land is situated within the revenue estate of village Nouch, Hadbast No. 63, Tehsil and District Kaithal. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 13.9.2005. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short 'the Collector') vide award dated 23.8.2006 assessed the market value of the RFA No. 3741 of 2009 (2) acquired land @ ` 5,00,000/- per acre. The land owners being dissatisfied with the award of the Collector filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned Court below assessed the compensation of the acquired land @ ` 6,00,000/- per acre. Aggrieved against the award of the learned court below, both the parties are in appeal before this court. Learned counsel for the landowners submitted that the court below has not awarded just and fair compensation for the acquired land while considering the location of the land. The sale-deeds, Ex. P-1, Ex.P-2, and Ex.P-13, produced by the landowners on record were not considered while determining market value of the acquired land. Vide sale-deed, Ex. P-1, land measuring 8 kanals was sold on 5.10.2006 for ` 13,50,000/- and vide sale- deed, Ex. P-2, land measuring 1 kanal was sold on 28.3.2003 at an average price of ` 7,20,000/- per acre. Vide sale-deed, Ex. P-13, land measuring 5 marlas was sold on 27.7.2005, at an average price of ` 9,60,000/- per acre. The genuineness of these transactions is not in doubt. These sale- transactions are of village Nouch itself. Inspite of that the learned court below without any basis assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 6,00,000/- per acre. No cut is required to be applied as this village is developing like a town. The learned court below while determining the market value of the acquired land has totally ignored the location and potentiality of the land. The submission was for determination of value keeping in view the location and the evidence led by the landowners on record. Another submission made by learned counsel for the landowners was that due to construction of channel the land of the landowners has been divided into two parts but no compensation has been awarded on account of severance. In response to the contentions raised by learned counsel for the land owners, learned counsel for the State submitted that the court below had wrongly relied upon sale-deed, Ex. P-2, while determining the amount of compensation payable for the acquired land. The sale-deeds, Ex. R-1 and Ex. R-2, produced on record by the State were totally ignored. The evidence led by the land owners did not justify any increase whatsoever. There is no RFA No. 3741 of 2009 (3) site plan produced on record by the land owners to show where the land pertaining to sale deeds relied upon by them, is located. The State Government has issued policies fixing minimum floor rates in the State for valuation of the acquired land. Vide policy dated 28.4.2005, the minimum floor rate in the area in question in the State was ` 5,00,000/- per acre which was further revised vide policy dated 6.4.2007 to ` 8,00,000/- per acre which was made applicable only where the awards were announced on or after 22.3.2007. But the learned court below without there being any reason enhanced the compensation for the acquired land. Learned State counsel further submitted that it is due to the policy of the State Government that the value of the land was determined @ ` 5,00,000/- per acre by the Collector, otherwise the value of the land in the area was not as much which was awarded by the learned court below. The prayer was for restoration of award of the Collector. As regards severance, the submission was that the land owners have not led any evidence to show as to in what manner, they have suffered loss on account of acquisition of land for channel. Accordingly, the learned court below had rightly negatived the claim to that extent. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. In support of their claim for enhancement of compensation for the acquired land, both the parties have produced on record the following sale instances:- Exhibit Date of sale Area Sale price in ` Price per acre in ` Ex. P-1 5.10.2006 8 kanals 13,50,000/- 13,50,000/- Ex. P-2 28.3.2003 1 kanal 90,000/- 7,20,000/- Ex. P-13 27.7.2005 5 marlas 30,000/- 9,60,000/- Ex. R-1 12.5.2005 14 kanals 3 marlas 4,25,000/- 2,40,000/- Ex. R-2 17.6.2005 8 kanals 3,12,000/- 3,12,000/- The land dealt with in sale-deed, Ex. P-1, was sold on 5.10.2006 for ` 13,50,000/-, whereas notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case was issued on 23.8.2005, therefore, the same cannot be said to RFA No. 3741 of 2009 (4) be a good piece of evidence to assess the market value of the acquired land. Sale-deed, Ex. P-13, was registered on 27.7.2005. It is a small plot of 5 marlas land which cannot be considered for determining the market value of big chunk of land. Vide sale-deed, Ex. P-2, dated 28.3.2003, land measuring 1 kanal was sold at an average price of ` 7,20,000/- per acre. No site plan showing the location of these sale-deeds viz-a-viz the acquired land has been placed on record. As far as sale-deeds, Ex. R-1 and R-2, produced on record by the State are concerned, the same are of no use as the award of the Collector is more than the value shown in these sale deed. Accordingly, these sale-deeds cannot be relied upon while assessing the market value of the acquired land. The State Government had issued policies, fixing minimum rates for valuation of the acquired land in the State. Vide policy dated 6.4.2007, the minimum rates as were fixed on 28.4.2005 for acquisition of land in the State of Haryana, were revised. The relevant extract of policy, dated 6.4.2007, is as under:- "Sub: Fixation of floor rates for the acquisition of land for public purpose in the State of Haryana. Ref: This Department Memo No. 2025-R-5-2005/4299, dated 28.4.2005. Vide this Department Memo. under reference, minimum floor rates for acquiring land for public purposes for various Departments as well as other State Agencies were fixed by the Haryana Government as follows: i) Minimum floor rate for urbanisable area of Gurgaon. Rs. 15.00 lacs per acre ii) Minimum floor rate for rest of the Haryana Sub-Region of NCR inlcuding Panchkula and area of Chandigarh periphery in the Haryana State. Rs.12.50 lacs per acre. iii) Minimum floor rate for the rest of the Haryana State. Rs. 05.00 lacs per acre. (These floor rates did not include the solatium and interest payable under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894). 2. Now it has been observed that with the passage of time RFA No. 3741 of 2009 (5) market rates of the land have increased substantially. Therefore, Haryana Government has re-considered this matter and has decided to re-fix these floor rates as follows: i) Minimum floor rate for urbanisable area of Gurgaon. Rs. 20.00 lacs per acre ii) Minimum floor rate for rest of the Haryana Sub-Region of NCR inlcuding Panchkula and area of Chandigarh periphery in the Haryana State. Rs.16.00 lacs per acre. iii) Minimum floor rate for the rest of the Haryana State. Rs. 08.00 lacs per acre. 3. These floor rates do not include the solatium and interest payable under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 4. These revised rates will be applicable on all those acquisitions where awards have been announced on or after 22.3.2007 irrespective of the date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894." As per the aforesaid letter dated 6.4.2007 the minimum floor rate for the rest of the Haryana State was fixed @ ` 8,00,000/- per acre and the rates are applicable to all those acquisitions where awards have been announced on or after 22.3.2007 irrespective of date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. In the present case, the award was announced by the Collector on 23.8.2006 whereas the policy dated 6.4.2007 comes into force with effect on 22.3.2007. A perusal of aforesaid policies shows that from the year 2005 to 2007 the State of Haryana itself had increased the value of the land by 60% in the area in question i.e. from ` 5,00,000/- to ` 8,00,000/- per acre. These revised rates are applicable on the awards announced on or after 22.3.2007 irrespective of the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. Notification under Section 4 of the Act in the present case was issued on 23.8.2005 and the award by the Collector was announced on 23.8.2006. A perusal of the aforesaid policies shows that after a gap of nearly two years, the minimum compensation payable for acquisition of land was enhanced @ 30% per annum or the price as shown in 2005 is 37.5% less than the price shown in the year 2007. This is evident of rising prices of RFA No. 3741 of 2009 (6) land on which there is lot of pressure in recent times because of demand for urbanization and other infrastructural facilities. The aforesaid policy letter, in my opinion, can be considered as a piece of evidence showing the value of the land and considering the fact that the award in the present case was announced about seven months prior thereto, a reasonable cut can be applied. Keeping in view the increase shown by the Government itself in the prices of land, the value of the land in the present set of appeals is determined @ ` 6,50,000/- per acre. The landowners are also be held entitled to all the statutory benefits available under the Act. Further there being no clinching evidence on record to show any loss on account of alleged division of land, claim for damages on account of severance has rightly been denied. The appeals are disposed of in the above terms. 23.3.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge