…1… IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA RFA No._17 of 2001 Judgment reserved on: 29.6.2009 Date of decision: 20.7.2009. Shakuntla Devi ….Appellant Vs. Land Acquisition Collector …. Respondent. ________________________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the Appellant : Mr. B.B. Vaid, Advocate . For the Respondent : Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge. This appeal has been directed against the award dated 19.9.2000 passed by District Judge, Bilaspur in Land Ref. Case No.19 of 1998 for enhancement of compensation. 2. The facts in brief are that Department of Public Works, Himachal Pradesh Government issued notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘Act’), which was published in the official Gazette on 22.6.1996 for acquisition of land for public purpose for the construction of National Highway No.21 in village Dhar Binderya, Sub Tehsil Shri Naini Devi Ji, Distt Bilaspur, H.P. The Collector announced the award on 1.10.1997 and had Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes …2… determined the market value of the acquired land comprised in khasra No.17/3, measuring 0-17 biswas at the rate of Rs.800/- per biswa. In addition, the Collector has awarded 30% solatium, interest at the rate of 9% and at the rate of 15% under Section 34 of the Act. 3. The appellant was not satisfied with the award of the Collector, had filed reference petition under Section 18 of the Act and claimed compensation at the rate of Rs.4,00,000/- per bigha. She also claimed compensation for trees, compulsory acquisition charges and interest etc. 4. The respondent contested the claim of the appellant and pleaded that compensation has been awarded to the appellant in accordance with the market rate prevailing at the relevant time. The respondent denied the claim of the appellant. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed:- 1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to enhanced amount of compensation on account of the market value of the acquired land and trees etc, if so, to what extent? OPP 2. Relief. 5. The District Judge assessed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.1300/- per biswa and has held that as against the compensation of Rs.13,600/- the appellant is entitled to compensation of Rs.22,100/-. The District Judge has thus enhanced the compensation payable to appellant to Rs.8,500/-. On the enhanced amount of compensation Rs.8,500/-, the District Judge has allowed solatium at the rate of 30%, …3… additional amount under Section 23(1-A) of the Act at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of publication of notification i.e. 14.5.1996 till date of award dated 1.10.1997. The interest at the rate of 9% per annum for one year from 1.10.1997 to 30.9.1998 and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum was also awarded to appellant. In appeal the appellant has claimed Rs.1,00,000/- compensation over and above the amount awarded by the District Judge. 6. Heard and perused the record. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the District Judge has not properly construed the evidence on record on the basis of average sale price of two sale deeds Ex.PA and Ex.PB. The District Judge has assessed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.6500/- per biswa, thereafter without any basis deduction of 80% has been made from the market value so assessed in coming to the conclusion that market value of the acquired land comes to Rs.1300/- per biswa as against Rs.800/- per biswa determined by the Collector. The deduction made by the District Judge in determining the market value is highly excessive. The learned Addl. Advocate General has supported the impugned award. 7. PW-1 Parkash Chand vendor had sold three biswas of land in village Kutehla for a consideration of Rs.15,000/- to Roshan Lal and Sita Ram on 1.1.1993 vide sale deed Ex.PA. He has stated that this land is at a distance of one kilometer from the acquired land of appellant. The acquired land is better in quality than the land which was sold by him. The acquired land is situated …4… in Dhar Binderya which is adjoining to village Kutehla. PW-2 Roshan Lal is one of the vendees of sale deed dated 1.1.1993. He has corroborated the statement of PW-1 Parkash Chand on material particulars. PW-3 Shakuntla has stated that the market value of the acquired land was Rs.4,00,000/- per bigha at the time of its acquisition. She has stated that she had sold two biswas of land on 15.1.1994 to Gopala in village Dhar Binderya for a consideration of Rs.16,000/- vide sale deed Ex.PB. 8. PW-4 Gopal Krishan is the vendee of sale deed Ex.PB. He has denied that sale deed Ex.PB is a fabricated document. PW-5 Brij Lal, Patwari has stated that Rs.1500/- per biswa rate was approved in the present case whereas the market value was assessed at Rs.800/- per biswa. He has stated that there were trees on the acquired land and their value was assessed at Rs.12,187/-. The statement showing compensation Ex.PC and list of trees Ex.PD were tendered in evidence on behalf of the appellant in the reference Court. The respondent did not lead any evidence and the evidence of the respondent was closed by the court on 2.6.2000. 9 The notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on 22.6.1996. The sale deed Ex.PA is of village Kutehla which is at a distance of one kilometer from the acquired land. As per sale deed Ex.PA, three biswas of land was sold for a consideration of Rs.15,000/- on 1.1.1993. The vendor and one of the vendees of sale deed Ex.PA have proved the said sale deed. The sale deed Ex.PB dated 15.1.1994 is of the same village where …5… the acquired land is situated and as per sale deed Ex.PB, two biswa of land was sold by appellant to Gopala. The sale deed Ex.PB has also been proved by the vendor. 10. In ONGC Ltd. vs. Sendhabhai Vastram patel and others (2005) 6 SCC 454, it has been held that in absence of exemplars of the same village sale deed of the adjoining village can be taken into consideration for determining the market value of the acquired land. PW-1 Parkash Chand has stated that village Kutehla and village Dhar Binderya are adjacent villages, therefore, sale deed Ex.PA of the adjoining village can be taken into consideration for determining the market value of the acquired land. The sale deed Ex.PB is of the same village where the land has been acquired. Both the sale deeds are prior to the publication of notification under section 4 of the Act. In these circumstances, the District Judge has committed no error in relying sale deeds Ex.PA and Ex.PB for determining the market value of the acquired land. 11. The District Judge on the basis of average sale price of sale deeds Ex.PA and Ex.PB has recorded a finding that market value of the acquired land comes to Rs.6500/- per biswa. The District Judge from this market value without assigning any reason has made deduction of 80% in order to determine the market value of the acquired land. The acquired land is only 17 biswas and cannot be said to be a very big chunk of land. No doubt, the sale deed Ex.PA is of the land which is at a distance of one kilometer from the acquired land but PW-1 has stated that the acquired land is better in comparison to the land which was sold vide sale deed …6… Ex.PA. The sale deed Ex.PA is of three biswas of land and the sale deed Ex.PB is of two biswas of land. In H.P. Housing Board vs. Bharat S. Negi (2004) 2 SCC 184 in the context of sale instance of small piece of land in comparison to acquisition of large piece of land, a deduction of 33 1/3% was allowed by the Supreme Court. In the present case on the basis of principle laid down by the Supreme Court, a deduction of 33 1/3% can be made from Rs.6500 in order to correctly arrive at the market value of the acquired land which come to Rs.6500-Rs.2016 = Rs.4484/- or say Rs.4480/- per biswa. Thus, the market value of 17 biswas lands comes to Rs.4480 x 17 = Rs.76,160/- as against Rs.13,600/- assessed by the Collector. Thus enhancement of compensation comes to Rs.76,160 – Rs.13,600 = Rs. 62,560/-. 12. On the enhanced amount of compensation Rs.62,560/- ,the appellant is also entitled to amount at the rate of 12% per annum from 22.6.1996, the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act to 1.10.1997, the date of award of the Collector under Section 23(1-A) , the appellant is also entitled to solatium at the rate of 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation under Section 23(2-A) of the Act, 9% interest for one year from 22.6.1996 and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till payment. 13. In light of above discussion, the appeal is allowed, award dated 19.9.2000 passed by District Judge, in Land Ref. Case No.19 of 1998 is modified. The appellant is held entitled to enhance amount of compensation Rs.62,560/-, 12% amount per …7… annum on the enhanced amount of compensation from 22.6.1996, to 1.10.1997 under Section 23(1-A) of the Act, 30% solatium on the enhanced amount of compensation under Section 23(2-A) of the Act, 9% interest for one year from 22.6.1996 and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till payment. No costs. ( Kuldip Singh) Judge July 20, 2007 (sks) …8…