R.F.A. No. 2564 of 2005 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RFA No. 2564 of 2005 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.1.2011 Kailasho and others .....Appellants vs State of Haryana .....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Sanjeev Sheokand, Mr. V. D. Sharma, Mr. D. S. Nain, Mr. Suresh Ahlawat, Mr. H. N. Sahu, Mr. S. N. Pillania, Mr. S. K. Bhardwaj, Advocates. Mr. S. K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for Mr. S. K. Jain, Advocate, Mr. S. K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate, Mr. S. K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, Advocate, Mr. Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate for Mr. R. N. Lohan, Advocate, for the land owners. Mr. Anjum Ahmed, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This order will dispose of the following appeals bearing RFA Nos. 2564 to 2566, 2608 of 2005; RFA Nos. 1606, 1689 to 1712, 1880 to 1886, 2231 to 2247, 2417, 2418, 2474 to 2480, 2483 to 2498, 2586, 2594, 2647 to 2661, 2712, 2713, 2728 to 2732, 2857 to 2862, 2865 to 2875, 2879 to 2888, 3007 to 3023, 3142 to 3149, 3217 to 3219, 3503 to 3509, 3744 to 3756, 3764 to 3775, 3828, 3829, 3837, 3838, 3846, 3847, 3860 to 3866, 3870, 3894 to 3905, 3910 to 3913, 3973, 3974, 3978 to 3984, 3987 to 3989, 3992 to 3994, 4013 to 4015, 4070 to 4092, 4372 to 4386, 4401, 4402, 4442, 4443, 4448, 4467, 4604 to 4608, 4649 to 4653, 4707, 4727 to 4731 of 2006; R.F.A. No. 2564 of 2005 [2] RFA Nos. 67, 68, 90 to 95, 144, 147, 328, 694, 777 to 782, 1598, 1600 to 1602, 1894 to 1897, 1899 to 1922, 1985 to 1990, 2553, 2554, 2879, 2896, 3168, 3333 to 3358, 3397 to 3399, 3607, 3754, 3755, 4112 to 4114 of 2007; RFA Nos. 954, 955, 3755 to 3763, 5189 to 5192, 5777 of 2008; RFA Nos. 26 and 710 of 2009, as common questions of law and facts are involved. In the appeals filed by the land owners, they are seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Whereas in the appeals filed by the State of Haryana, prayer is for reduction thereof. The land was acquired for the purpose of construction of Barsola Feeder, Ramkali minor and Kalwa-Kinana drain, vide different notifications pertaining to land of different villages, which were located nearby. The facts thereof are given in the succeeding paras. Vide notification dated 21.11.1997, published on 23.12.1997, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), State of Haryana sought to acquire 68 kanals and 6 marlas of land, situated in villages Uchana Kalan, Ghasso Kalan, Dumarkha Kalan, Ghaso Khurd, Sedha Majra, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind, for construction of Barsola Feeder. The same was followed by notification dated 8.12.1997 published on 13.1.1998, issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') awarded compensation for the acquired land at the following rates:- Name of the village Compensation assessed in ` Uchana Kalan 1,10,000/ per acre for nehri and ` 1,40,000/- per acre for the land falling between Latani road to Narnaund road. Ghasso Kalan 1,10,000/- per acre Dumarkha Kalan 1,40,000/- per acre Ghaso Khurd 1,30,000/-per acre Sedha Majra 1,10,000/- per acre Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land of all the villages @ ` 3,00,000/- per acre. R.F.A. No. 2564 of 2005 [3] Vide another notification dated 23.4.2000 published on 16.5.2000, issued under Section 4 of the Act, State of Haryana, sought to acquire 144 kanals 1 marla of land, situated in village Kinana, Anoopgarh, and Shamlo Kalan, Tehsil and District Jind, for construction of Ramkali Minor. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 12.8.2000 and was published on 14.8.2000. The Collector awarded compensation for the acquired land of different villages at the following rates:- Name of the village Compensation assessed in ` Kinana 1,75,000/- per acre for nehri and ` 1,60,000/- per acre for chahi land. Anoopgarh 1,75,000/- per acre for nehri and ` 1,60,000/- per acre for chahi land. Shamlo Kalan 1,70,000/- per acre Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land of different villages @ ` 3,00,000/- per acre. Vide another notification dated 23.4.2000 published on 16.5.2000, issued under Section 4 of the Act, State of Haryana, sought to acquire land, situated in villages Shamlo Khurd, Bibipur, Ramkali, Bahbalpur, Kinana and Khema Kheri, Tehsil and District Jind, for construction of Ramkali Minor. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 12.8.2000, and was published on 14.8.2000. The Collector awarded compensation for the acquired land of different villages at the following rates:- Name of the village Compensation assessed in ` Shamlo Khurd 1,60,000/- per acre Bibipur 1,50,000/- per acre Ramkali 1,60,000/- per acre Bahbalpur 1,50,000/- per acre Kinana 1,75,000/- per acre for nehri and ` 1,60,000/- per acre for chahi land. Khema Kheri 1,60,000/- per acre for nehri and ` 1,50,000/- per acre for chahi land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land of different villages at R.F.A. No. 2564 of 2005 [4] the following rates:- Name of the village Compensation assessed in ` Shamlo Khurd 3,00,000/- per acre Bibipur 2,20,000/- per acre Ramkali 3,00,000/- per acre Bahbalpur 3,00,000/- per acre Kinana 3,00,000/- per acre Khema Kheri 2,60,000/- per acre for nehri and ` 2,50,000/- per acre for chahi land. Vide notification dated 30.8.2000 published on 31.8.2000, issued under Section 4 of the Act, State of Haryana, sought to acquire land, situated in villages Brar Kalan, Siwaha, Baroli, Kinana and Shamlo Khurd, District Jind, for construction of Kalwa Kinana Drain. The same was followed by notification dated 12.1.2001, published on 15.1.2001 issued under Section 6 of the Act. The Collector awarded compensation for the acquired land of different villages at the following rates:- Name of the village Compensation assessed in ` Brar Kalan 1,50,000/- per acre for nehri/chahi and ` 3,00,000/- per acre for gair mumkin land. Siwaha 1,50,000/- per acre for nehri/chahi, ` 70,000/- per acre for barani, and ` 3,00,000/- per acre for gair mumkin land. Baroli 1,50,000/- per acre Kinana 1,80,000/- per acre for nehri and ` 3,00,000/- per acre for the land near National Highway road on both sides upto one acre. Shamlo Khurd 1,50,000/- per acre Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owners filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land at the following rates:- Name of the village Compensation assessed in ` Brar Kalan 3,00,000/- per acre for nehri/chahi and ` 4,50,000/- per acre for gair mumkin kidns of land. Siwaha 3,00,000/- per acre for nehri, ` 1,40,000/- per acre for barani, and ` 5,00,000/- per acre for gair mumkin land. Baroli 3,00,000/- per acre Kinana 3,00,000/- per acre Shamlo Khurd 3,00,000/- per acre R.F.A. No. 2564 of 2005 [5] Both the parties are before this court against the aforesaid awards of the learned court below. A perusal of the impugned awards shows that the landowners in the present set of appeals have failed to lead any documentary evidence to justify their claim to the effect that the value of the acquired land as assessed by the Collector was not just and fair. They merely led oral evidence. Still the learned court below applying a thumb rule enhanced the compensation. Though the State had also produced sale-deeds on record, however, the location thereof was not shown on any of the site plan produced on record. The site plan has been produced on record showing the location of the acquired land. It is further evident from the impugned award that the learned court below has recorded that as a consequence of the acquisition, the land of the landowners has been divided into two parts. This may be correct for the land of some of the villages, however, as far as land of village Dungarkhan Kalan is concerned, a perusal of the site plan shows that the land acquired therein is located just adjoining to the railway line, and in such a situation, the bifurcation of the land may not be there. Though in the aforesaid circumstances of the case and considering the material on record, this court could dismiss the appeals filed by the landowners seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land and considering the same evidence, finding some merits in the appeals filed by the State seeking reduction thereof, could allow these appeals. However, the facts remain that the land is quite dear to the farmers. It is their bread and butter. If the same is acquired for any public good and to serve a larger public interest for the benefit of the public in general, the persons whose land had been acquired, certainly deserve to be compensated adequately therefor. The onus to prove that the value of the acquired land, as assessed by the Collector, was not correct, is always on the land owners, which has to be discharged by leading cogent evidence. Considering the aforesaid facts, I deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned awards and remit the case back to the learned court below for fresh decision after permitting the parties to lead further evidence to justify their claim. Keeping in view the fact that the acquisition R.F.A. No. 2564 of 2005 [6] proceedings started in the year 1997, the parties through their counsels are directed to appear before learned District Judge, Jind on 5.3.2011. The learned District Judge may either keep the references with himself or entrust the same to any of the Additional District Judge. The learned court below shall dispose of the cases expeditiously, preferably by the end of year 2011 after affording adequate opportunities to both the parties, may be by giving short dates. As a consequence of the setting aside of the awards of the court below, the landowners shall not be liable to refund the amount already received by them. However, they shall abide by fresh award which may be passed by the learned court below after remand. The appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated above. 19.1.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs Judge