R.F.A. No. 3103 of 1993 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: November 5 ,2008 1 R.F.A. No. 3087 of 1993 Jasbir Singh ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 2 R.F.A. No. 3088 of 1993 Dalip Singh ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 3 R.F.A. No. 3089 of 1993 Smt. Surjit Kaur ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 4 R.F.A. No. 3090 of 1993 Sadhu Singh (deceased) through LRS ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 5 R.F.A. No. 3091 of 1993 Zora Singh ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 6 R.F.A. No. 3092 of 1993 Gurcharan Kaur and others ....Appellants Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 7 R.F.A. No. 3093 of 1993 Smt. Gurmel Kaur (deceased) through LRs ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents R.F.A. No. 3103 of 1993 [2] 8 R.F.A. No. 3094 of 1993 Ugar Singh ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 9 R.F.A. No. 3095 of 1993 Ishar Singh and another ....Appellants Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 10 R.F.A. No. 3096 of 1993 Gurcharan Kaur and others ....Appellants Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 11 R.F.A. No. 3097 of 1993 Gurdev Singh (deceased) through his LRs ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 12 R.F.A. No. 3098 of 1993 Harbans Singh ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 13 R.F.A. No. 3099 of 1993 Jagir Singh and others ....Appellants Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 14 R.F.A. No. 3100 of 1993 Tapinder Singh ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents R.F.A. No. 3103 of 1993 [3] 15 R.F.A. No. 3101 of 1993 Smt. Dalip Kaur (deceased) through his LRs ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 16 R.F.A. No. 3102 of 1993 Avtar Singh (deceased) through his LRs ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 17 R.F.A. No. 3103 of 1993 Amarjit Singh ....Appellant Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents 18 R.F.A. No. 3197 of 1993 Smt. Pritam Kaur and others ....Appellants Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Sunil Chadha, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. O. P. Dabla, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of a bunch of above mentioned 18 appeals, as the same arise out of a common acquisition. The land owners are in appeal against the award of the learned Court below seeking further enhancement in the compensation for the acquired land. The facts have been extracted from R.F.A. No. 3103 of 1993. Briefly, the facts are that vide notification dated 25.3.1988, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), State of Punjab acquired 304 kanals and 9 marlas of land situated in the revenue estate of Village Baddowal, District Ludhiana for setting up of Indo Tibetian Border Police, Battalion Headquarters at Village Badowal. The same was followed by notification dated 8.4.1988 issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land R.F.A. No. 3103 of 1993 [4] Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') determined the market value at Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre for the land abutting National Highway and Rs. 80,000/- per acre for the land situated at a distance of two acres away from the national Highway. The learned Additional District Judge, on reference under Section 18 of the Act, assessed the market value at a flat rate @ Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the value of the acquired land which was strategic in location has not been considered by the learned Court below after proper appreciation of the evidence produced on record. The location is on main National Highway, which is just six kilometers away from Railway Station, Ludhiana, a fast developing industrial city. The future potential of the land has been totally ignored. Referring to sale deeds (Ex. A1 to Ex. A6), the submission is that the price of the land in the area was quite high, which continued to increase in future at a very high pace. It was for the reason that the area had great potential of urbanisation, Ludhiana being fast developing city. The pressure for development was on this side of National Highway was more. Just after two years of acquisition, the land which was being sold for about Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre was sold for Rs. 6,00,000/- per acre. He further submitted that as the land abuts the National Highway, the valuation of the entire chunk of land at the same rate is not appropriate as the land which abuts the National Highway will certainly fetch more price as compared to the land behind it. Learned counsel for the appellants raised additional arguments in R.F.A. No. 3098 of 1993, where the claim was also with regard to acquisition of super structure. The submission is that substantial construction had been raised by the appellant therein for which a claim of Rs. 2,31,590/- was made on the basis of estimate prepared by the Draftsman. As against that, the Collector awarded a sum of Rs. 40,759/-, assessed on the basis of PWD rates, which was upheld by the court below. The appellant therein is entitled to compensation for acquisition of super structure to the extent it was claimed. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that the value of the land, as determined by the Collector was perfectly in order who had granted two different rates for the land abutting the National Highway upto the depth of two acres and for the land behind it. Still, as a matter of indulgence, the learned Court below determined the value of the entire land at the same rate which does not call for any interference as even the land owners, whose land was not abutting National Highway, have been granted more compensation than they deserved. Referring to the evidence led in the form of sale deeds (Ex. R53 to Ex. R57), the submission is that even after the acquisition, the value of the land in the R.F.A. No. 3103 of 1993 [5] vicinity was not more than Rs. 85,000/- per acre. Regarding super structure, the learned counsel for the State submitted that fair assessment of the value of the super structure has been made on the basis of PWD rates. The estimates produced by the appellant was not by an approved valuer and no defect could be pointed out in the estimate produced by the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance perused the relevant referred record. As far as the location of the acquired land is concerned, there is sufficient material on record to show that it is a compact block of land situated on Ludhiana-Ferozepur road, which was acquired for the purpose of construction of residential quarters for Indo Tibetian Border Police. Close to the acquired land is a stadium. Railway Station of Baddowal is at a distance of 1-1/2 kilometers from the acquired land. Coming to the evidence led by the parties, as far as sale deeds (Ex. A1 and Ex. A2) are concerned, the same cannot be considered for the reason that these are quite old in time, namely, executed about 8/9 years before the acquisition. The position regarding sale deeds (Ex. A4 to Ex. A6) is also similar in the sense that the same also cannot be considered having been executed after the date of acquisition. Even the sale deeds (Ex. R53 to Ex. R57) produced by the State are also after the acquisition. The only relevant sale deed (Ex. A3) which though is prior to the acquisition but is quite close as far as date of execution is concerned. Vide this sale deed, one kanal 15 marlas of land was sold for Rs. 40,000/- at an average price of Rs. 1,82,956/- per acre. A perusal of the site plan on record shows that the land forming part therein is located of the main road. For the purpose of determination of fair value of the acquisition of big chunk of land measuring 304 kanals 9 marlas, a reasonable cut has certainly to be applied. The compensation, as has been awarded by the learned court below @ Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre, is arrived at if a cut of 45% is applied considering the value of the land in sale deed (Ex. A3) which cannot be said to be unreasonable. Considering the fact that sale deed (Ex. A3) is about 2-1/2 years prior in time than the acquisition in the present case, no increase as such can be given for the time gap in two notifications for the reason that there are sale deeds available after the acquisition of land in the area showing the value of the land in great variation which does not show general rising trend in the area. There are sale deeds (Ex. A5 and Ex. A6) produced by the land owners showing the value of the land in the range of Rs. 4,80,000/- to Rs. 6,00,000/- per acre where the sale was for small plots of 7 marlas and 16 marlas respectively. On the other hand, there are sale deeds produced by the State which were executed R.F.A. No. 3103 of 1993 [6] from June, 1988 to August, 1990 showing per acre price range of Rs. 40,000/- to Rs. 80,000/- per acre. However, from a perusal of the site plan, it is evident that the land forming part in sale deeds (Ex. A3 and Ex. R53 to Ex. R57) are not located on the main road. Considering this fact, in my opinion, the value, as assessed, of the land situated on the National Highway certainly deserves more consideration. Accordingly, for the land situated upto the depth of one acre from the National Highway, a cut of 30% on the value of land, as shown in sale deed (Ex. A3) would be appropriate. Therefore, reducing a sum of Rs. 54,956/-, the value of the acquired land is assessed at Rs. 1,28,000/- per aqcre. Now the issue comes regarding the valuation of the super structure. The land owner in the present case has been granted compensation for the acquisition of super structure of the amount calculated at P.W.D. Rates, whereas the land owner got the construction valued through a Draftsman. There is substantial difference between the two valuations. Certain guesswork has to be applied by this Court. Keeping in view the earlier judgments of this Court where increase to the extent of 25% was granted in the value assessed at PWD rates for the reason that the value of super structure at PWD rates is on conservative side and the fact the cement and steel is supplied at controlled rates, in my considered opinion, even if a conservative view is taken, the land owner in the present case would be entitled to increase of 25% on the value of the super structure as assssed by the Collector. In view of my aforesaid discussion, the value of the acquired land is assessed at Rs. 1,28,000/- per acre. As far as valuation of super structure is concerned, the land owner shall be entitled to increase of 25% on the value, as assessed by the Collector. The appellants shall also be entitled to all the statutory benefits available under the Act. The appeals are allowed with costs in the above terms. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge November 5 ,2008 mk