RFA No.2487 of 1991 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No.2487 of 1991 Date of decision 29.10.2009 Dargah Singh & Another ..... Appellants VERUS State of Punjab, through Land Acquisition Collector ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be report in the Digest? Present: Ms.Archana Saini, Advovcates for the appellants. Ms.Ambika Luthra, AAG, Punjab, for the respondent(s). *** HEMANT GUPTA J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of following six appeals arising out of the Award of the Reference Court dated 14.08.1991. Sr.No. Appeal No. Name of the parties 1 RFA No.2487 of 1991 Dargah Singh & Anr V/s State of Punjab 2 RFA No.2488 of 1991 Durgah Singh and Anr. V/s State of Punjab 3 RFA No.2489 of 1991 Chanchal Bajaj V/s State of Punjab 4 RFA No.62 of 1992 Punjab State V/s Chanchal Bajaj 5 RFA No.63 of 1992 State of Punjab V/s Durga Singh and another 6 RFA No.684 of 1992 State of Punjab V/s Durga Singh and another The land measuring .88 acre (7 kanals) was intended to be acquired for a public purpose i.e. for setting up of Diesel Component Workshop and its residential colony vide notification dated 12.03.1985 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act). Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 27.06.1985. RFA No.2487 of 1991 -2- The Land Acquisition Collector announced his Award No.1 dated 10.04.1987. A sum of Rs.1,75,000/- for the land acquired land i.e. @ Rs.2,00,000/- per acre was determined as the market value. The land owners were also found entitled to severance charges of Rs.2,000/- apart from the other statutory benefits. Dissatisfied with the amount of the compensation, the land- owners sought references for determination of the market value of the acquired land under Section 18 of the Act. The learned Reference Court considered the various sale instances produced by the parties and found that the sale instances produced by both the parties is in respect of sale of small areas. The sale deeds Ex. P-2 to Ex.P-8 referred to by the land owners, were found to be of the year 1990-91. The learned Reference Court found that the location of the land subject matter of sale deeds Ex.P-2 to Ex.P-8 has not been pointed out in the Plan Ex.P-1 and Ex.P-13-Aks Latha. The respondents have also not produced any site plan in respect of the location of the land subject matter of sale instances Exhibits R-1 to R-5. But such sale instances are not reflected to be disadvantageous viz.a.viz. the land sold vide sale deeds Ex. P-2 to P-8. The learned trial Court arrived at average sale consideration of all the sale deeds Ex. P-2 to Ex. P-8 and Ex. R-1 to Ex. R-5. It imposed a cut of 1/3rd of such average price on account of sale of small areas. By such process , it arrived at market value of Rs.3,44,800/- per acre. Still aggrieved, the parties are in appeal. The contention of the land owners in appeal is that an average price of the land conveyed in sale deed Ex. P-2 to Ex. P-8 should have been taken into consideration and not the sale instances Ex. R-1 to Ex. R-5. Such sale instances Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-5 RFA No.2487 of 1991 -3- were not taken into consideration by the Land Acquisition Collector as well as by the learned Reference Court. Since the average sale consideration of sale instances Ex. P-2 to Ex. P-8 is Rs.7,93,161.70, thus, suitable deduction should have been made on such average price. Therefore, the process of determination of market value is not reasonable or fair The learned Reference Court has arrived at a categorical finding that the location of the land which is subject matter of the sale deeds Ex. P-2 to Ex. P-8 has not been specified in the Plan Ex. P-1 and in Ex. P-13 Aks Latha. In the absence of the specific location of the site of the land, the subject matter of sale deeds Ex. P-2 to Ex. P-8, the same cannot be made basis for determining the market value. Learned counsel for the appellants could not identify the location of land conveyed vide the aforesaid sale deeds. Therefore, the price of the sale deeds does not provide for a reasonable yardstick to determine the market value of the land acquired. The learned Reference Court has arrived at the market value on average basis. Such process cannot be said to be irrelevant or arbitrary. The same cannot be said to be unreasonable merely because another yardstick for determining the amount of market value could have been applied. In view of the above, I do not find that any case is made out for any variation in the amount of market value determined by the Reference Court. Consequently, the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs. 29.10.2009 (HEMANT GUPTA) shamsher JUDGE