RFA No.948 of 1991 1 In the Punjab and Haryana High Court,at Chandigarh. RFA No. 948 of 1991 Decided on December 04,2008. Gram Panchayat,Deh,Daboda Khurd,Tehsil Bahadurgarh District Rohtak -- Appellant vs. State of Haryana and another -- Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.R.A.Yadav,Advocate,for the appellants. Mr.H.S.Hooda,Advocate General,Haryana,assisted by Mr.Rajiv Kawatra,Sr.D.A.G.,Haryana,for the respondents- State of Haryana. Rakesh Kumar Jain,J: This judgment shall dispose of 14 Regular First Appeals bearing R.F.A. No. 948, 474, 372,371, 336 of 1991, 2654, 2662, 2664, 2661, 2660, 2659, 2658, 2657 and 2663 of 1990 as common questions of law and facts are involved therein. Land measuring 23.190 acres situated in the revenue estate of village Daboda Khurd, Tehsil Bahadurgarh District Rohtak, was notified on 20.11.1988 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act,1894 (for short,'the Act'), published on 6.12.1988 followed by a notification of declaration under Section 6 of the Act, issued on 0.2.2.1989, published in the Official RFA No.948 of 1991 2 Gazette on 07.2.1989, for the public purpose, namely for the construction of Gurgaon Water Supply Channel. On actual measurement at the spot, the acquired land was found to be 23.270 acres (186 kanals 3 marlas). The Land Acquisition Collector, P.W.D. Irrigation Branch, Rohtak, (for short, 'the Collector') announced his award on 26.5.1989 and determined the compensation for the acquired land @ Rs.45,000/-per acre for Nehri land @ Rs.40,000/- per acre for Chahi land @ Rs.35,000/- per acre for Barani land and @ Rs.30,000/- per acre for Banjar Quadim and Gair-mumkin land. The land owners filed objections under Section 18 of the Act being aggrieved against the award of the Collector in which it was,inter-alia, alleged that the acquired land is situated in the vicinity of National Highway No.10 and Bahadurgarh Industrial Area. Thus, the price of the acquired land was not less than Rs. 2,00,000/- per acre. In the written statement filed by the Executive Engineer C.W.S Construction Division No.5,Bahadurgarh, it was pleaded that the compensation of the acquired land has been rightly assessed by the Collector after taking into consideration all the relevant factors. Both the parties led their oral as well as documentary evidence. The learned Reference Court vide its order dated 30.8.1990 dismissed the claim petitions and upheld the award of the Collector. The claimants being aggrieved against the order of the learned Reference Court have preferred these appeals. Mr. R.A.Yadav, learned counsel for the appellants/landowners has prepared a chart of the relevant sale deeds produced by both the landowners as well as State of Haryana which is marked as Mark 'A'. The RFA No.948 of 1991 3 sale deeds as tabulated by the learned counsel for the appellants are tabulated as under:- Exhibit Sale Deed dated Area Type of land Total sale considerati on in Rs. Revenue estate village Per Acre P-1 22.02.1989 18 M Nehri 20,000/- Daboda Khurd 1,78,000/- P-2 13.03.1989 57 K 10 M Nehri 7,11562/- Bhupania 99,800/- P-3 01/03/88 04 K Nehri 49,000/- Bhupania 98,000/- P-4 11/09/87 313 Sq. Yds. Plot 11,000/- Bhupania 1,70,000/- P-6 25.04.1990 07 K 12 M Nehri 1,50,000/- Daboda Khurd 1,58,000/- P-8 16.06.1984 17 M 15,000/- Daboda Khurd 1,41,176/- Exhibit Sale Deed dated Area Type of land Total sale considerati on in Rs. Revenue estate village Per Acre R-1 12/07/86 13 K 15 M Nehri 30,000/- Daboda Khurd 17454/- R-2 27.1.88 5 K 15 M Chahi 28,000/- Daboda Khurd 38956/- R-3 02/06/88 22 K 14 M Nehri 1,14,000/- Daboda Khurd 40176/- R-4 07/06/88 17 K 18 M Nehri 68,000/- Daboda Khurd 30400/- R-5 16.5.88 16 K 0 M Nehri 80,000/- Daboda Khurd 40000/- R-6 01/07/88 20 K 2 M Nehri 1,00,000/- Daboda Khurd 39800.99 R-7 14.9.88 20K 0 M Nehri 1,00,000/- Daboda Khurd 40000/- (residential house) Learned counsel for the appellants has vehemently contended that the learned Court below has committed an error in not relying upon the sale deed Ex.P-8 which is dated 16.6.1984 in respect of sale of 17 marlas of land in village Daboda Khurd for a consideration of Rs. 15,000/- which comes to Rs.1,41,176/- per acre. It is also submitted that in case the sale deed Ex.P-8 is not found to be suitable for assessing the market value RFA No.948 of 1991 4 being of the year 1984, the learned Court below should have relied upon the sale deed Ex.P-3 dated 1.3.1988 pertaining to 4 kanals of land which has been sold for Rs.49,000/- in village Bhupania which comes to Rs.98,000/- per acre and sale deed Ex.P-4 dated 11.9.1987 in respect of sale of 313 Sq. Yards in village Bhupania for Rs.11,000/- which comes to Rs.1,70,000/- per acre. On the other hand, Mr.Rajiv Kawatra, learned Senior D.A.G, Haryana, has contended that sale deed. Ex.P-8 is not a comparable sale instance because it is of the year 1984 whereas the land has been acquired in the year 1988. Further neither the nature of the land is known nor its location has been shown. In respect of sale deed Exs. P-3 and P-4, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents-State, that both the sale deeds pertain to different village (Bhupania) out of which sale deed Ex.P-4 pertains to a plot, and is not a comparable sale instance. Learned counsel for the respondents has rather submitted that as per the chart mentioned hereinbefore , all the sale deeds Exs. R-1 to R-7 relate to village Daboda Khurd out of which sale deeds Exs. R-2 to R-7 are in close proximity of the date of acquisition i.e. 20.11.1988. It is also submitted that agricultural land has been acquired for the purpose of construction of Gurgaon Water Supply Channel and the sale instances pertaining to Nehri land in the year starting from Exs. R-2 to R-7 consistently give price range between Rs.30,400/- to 40,176/- per acre. Learned counsel has thus submitted that the sale instances Exs. R-2 to R-7 are similar and comparable being in proximity of time and can be considered to be reasonable and safest criteria for the purpose of determination of compensation. RFA No.948 of 1991 5 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance. So far as the sale deeds Exs. P-3 and P-4 are concerned, these cannot be taken into consideration as sufficient evidence is available in the shape of sale instances pertaining to village Daboda Khurd,where the land in question has been acquired. Moreover, Ex.P-4 is a plot in village Bhupania which has been sold in square yards. Sale deed Ex. P-8 which has been primarily relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants/landowners for the purpose of re-determination of compensation is not located on the Akash-shizra Ex.P-5 produced by the claimants. May be the land involved in sale deed Ex.P-8 is so advantageously located, which can be put to any commercial or residential use since an area of only 17 marlas was sold for a huge sum of Rs. 15,000/- as far back as 16.6.1984. All the sale deeds produced by the State of Haryana pertain to Nehri land are of the year 1988 are fetching the prices not more than Rs.40,000/- per acre. Therefore, I do not agree with the contention raised by learned counsel for the landowners/claimants in respect of the consideration of sale deed Ex.P-8 for the purpose of assessing the market value of the acquired land which is classified into different categories in the award of the Collector. On other hand, I fully endorse the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the State that the value of the acquired land (Nehri) is consistently between Rs.38,956/- to Rs.40,176/- per acre as per sale deeds Exs. R-2 to R-7 Thus, In my view, the compensation awarded by the Collector is just and fair and hold that the market value of the land acquired at the time of acquisition was the same which has been assessed by the Collector. RFA No.948 of 1991 6 In view of my above discussion, all the appeals filed by the landowners/claimants are found to be without any merit and the same are hereby dismissed without no order as to costs. December 04,2008 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge