Delhi District Court
Sh. Sewa Ram vs Union Of India on 29 September, 2007
IN THE COURT OF SHRI YASHWANT KUMAR :
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (LAC) : DELHI
LAC No : 94/1/07 AWARD NO : 18/1983-84
Old No. : 105/87) VILLAGE : Gharauli, Delhi
In the matter of :
1 Sh. Sewa Ram
2 Sh. Bali Pal
Both sons of late Sh.Kishan Sahai
R/o Village Gahroli Shahdara, Delhi
...Petitioners
Versus
1 Union of India, through
Land Acquisition Collector/ADM,
Tehsil Preet Vihar, Office at D.C.Office,
Court Complex, Geeta Colony,
L.M.Bandh, Shahdara, Delhi
2 Delhi Development Authority
through its Vice Chairman,
Vikas Sadan, INA, Market, New Delhi
...Respondents
Reference received on : 23.05.1987
Award reserved on : 29.09.2007
Award announced on : 29.09.2007
AWARD
REFERENCE U/S 18 OF THE LAND ACQUISITION ACT
1 Vide notification No. F.8 (67)/76-L&B dated 17.11.1980 U/s 4 of
the LA Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) followed by declaration vide notification No. F.9(16)/80 L&B dated 29.09.1981 U/sec. 6 of the LA Act, the land including the land of the petitioners situate in the revenue estate of village Gharauli, Delhi was acquired by the Govt. for the planned development of Delhi. The Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as LAC), after completing all the requirements as provided under the Act, announced the award bearing No.18/1983-84 and awarded the compensation of the acquired land @ Rs.9,000/- per bigha for block I (A), Rs.7,000/- per bigha for Block II (B) and Rs.4,000/- per bigha for block III (C).
2 Feeling dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the LAC, the petitioners herein filed petition U/s 18 of the LA Act for proper adjudication/market value which was sent to the reference court.
3 In this reference petition, the petitioners have sought the enhancement of compensation on the grounds that the petitioners are the bhoomidhars and in possession of the land till it was acquired and possession taken over by the Govt. The land of the petitioners has been greatly under valued by the LAC. The potential value, its fertility, situation and kind of soil as well as its hypothetic uses have not been taken into consideration while awarding the compensation of the above said land. The land is situated within the heart of many developed colonies of Shahdara area and Mayur Vihar Colony is quite adjacent to the land in dispute and has its potential value for its ideal situation. The land is situated within the limit of Delhi Municipal Corporation and every facilities of roads, parks, water and electricity are available in the land. Due to the ideal situation and potentiality of the petitioners' land, the land can be used for residential as also for industrial purposes. The LAC has arbitrarily and illegally made the blocks of the petitioners' land. The entire land of the petitioners is given levelled chahi and cultivable. The land of the petitioners quite adjacent to NOIDA complex and the land can be used for industrial as well as residential site. Therefore, as per the petitioners, the LAC has not taken into consideration the aforesaid facts while assessing the market value of the land in question on the date of notification u/s 4 of the LA Act. On these grounds among others, the petitioners have filed this reference petition claiming @ Rs.100/- per sq. yard besides statutory benefits. The petitioners have also claimed Rs.50,000/- each for severance allowance. 4 UOI, in its written statement, has raised the objections on the grounds that the Delhi Land Reforms Act is applicable to the land in dispute. The title of the petitioners to claim any compensation or enhancement thereof has been denied as they are not the recorded owner in the revenue record. The correctness of the khasra nos., their area and the extent of share of the petitioners therein have been admitted only to the extent as specified by the LAC in his statement furnished U/s 19 of the LA Act. In response to notice issued by the LAC U/sec 9 & 10 of the LA Act, the petitioner has preferred claim. The land in question is not surrounded by any developed or un-developed colony and can only be used for agriculture. There was no structure, tree, well, or tube well on the land in question at the time of publication of notification U/sec. 4 of the LA Act. Despite opportunities given, DDA has not filed written statement, therefore, the right of filing of written statement by DDA was closed.
5 On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed by this Court on 24.09.2007 which are as under :
1 Whether the petitioners have got any right, title & interest in the land in question? OPP 2 What was the market value of the land in question at the time of issuance of notification u/s 4 of the LA Act? Onus on parties.
3 Whether the petitioners are entitled to enhancement in compensation, if so, to what amount? OPP 4 Relief
6 The counsel for the petitioners, in support of their case for enhancement in compensation, has tendered in evidence the certified copy of the application U/o 23 Rule 3 (compromise application) along with affidavits with order dt.29.05.2007 in RFA No.429/2002 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi as Ex.P-1(colly), photocopy of the certified copy of the judgment dt. 23.03.2002 passed by the Ld. ADJ, Delhi in LAC No.29/88 titled as UOI Vs Sewa Ram & Ors as Mark-A, certified copy of the judgment & decree dt. 02.06.2007 passed by this reference court in LAC No.29/1/06 titled as Dr.Anil Kumar Khurana Vs UOI as Ex.P-2. Whereas, the counsel for the respondents have tendered in evidence the copy of the award no.18/1983-84 pertaining to the village Gharauli, Delhi as Ex.R-1.
7 I have heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties and have perused the entire records. My issue-wise findings are as under :- ISSUE NO. 1 8 The onus to prove this issue is upon the petitioners. The present reference u/s 18 of the LA Act has been filed by the petitioners for enhancement in compensation for the land bearing khasra no.971/155- 160 min measuring 4 biswas. As per note mentioned on page no.3 of the statement u/s 19 of the LA Act forwarded by the LAC, the compensation of the said land was sent to the court of Ld. ADJ, Delhi under section 30- 31 of the LA Act. The petitioners have filed the photocopy of the certified copy of the judgment dt. 23.03.2002 passed by the Ld. ADJ, Delhi in LAC No.29/88 titled as UOI Vs Sewa Ram & Ors as Mark-A wherein there was a dispute in respect of the apportionment of compensation for the land bearing khasra no.971/155-160 (0-4), 1058/426/1 (9-7) & 425 (22-7) total measuring 31 bighas 18 biswas situate in Gharauli, Delhi acquired vide award no.18/1983-84. The Ld.ADJ, Delhi, while deciding the claim of all the IPs in the reference u/s 30-31 of the LA Act pertaining to the aforesaid khasra numbers, also held as under :
''However, so far as their claim in respect of the land comprised in khasra no.971/155-160 (0-4) is concerned, there is no other claimant as none has come forward till date to stake his claim for this land. As such, I hold that IPs no.1 & 2 are entitled to compensation for the land comprised in khasra no.971/155-160 (0-4). The compensation of this much land be paid to them in equal shares.'' 9 In the aforesaid LAC No.29/88 titled UOI Vs Sewa Ram & Ors., the IP nos.1 & 2 were Sh.Sewa Ram and Sh.Bali Pal respectively. However, aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of the Ld. ADJ, Delhi, Sh.Sewa Ram & Bali Pal filed the RFA No.429/2002 entitled Sh.Sewa Ram & Anr. Vs Meenakshi Khurana before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The application u/o 23 Rule 3 r/w/sec. 151 CPC was filed on behalf of the parties in the RFA No.429/2002 which have been proved by the petitioners herein as Ex.P-1 (colly). The relevant part of the contents of the said application signed by Mrs. Meenakshi Khurana, Sewa Ram & Sh.Bali Pal reads as under :
''4 That during the pendency of the aforesaid appeal, the parties thereto have amicably settled their disputes and differences due to intervention of their well wishers and common friends. As per the compromise arrived at between the parties the appellants are entitled to receive the enhanced compensation as well as other benefits as admissible under the Land Acquisition Act of land bearing khasra no.425 measuring 6 bighas only and the compensation of the remaining land in respect of khasra no. 425 measuring 16 bighas and 7 biswas is to be received by the respondent.
5 That the enhanced compensation in respect of land of khasra no.1058/426/1 (9-7) situated in the revenue estate of village Gharoli, Delhi is to be received by the respondent and the appellants/ IP nos 1 and 2 shall have no right, title and interest therein of any kind whatsoever.
6 That in case the respondents or her husband has sold out any plot of land out of the above said two khasra nos. before pronouncement of the award, then it would be respondent who shall be liable to deal with them. The appellants/IP nos. 1 & 2 shall not in any manner held liable to satisfy any claim of any plot holder since the appellants have already relinquished their right, title and interest in respect of the remaining land of both the khasras numbers land to meet out the claim of the plot holders. In view of the arrival of an amicable settlement between the parties the factum of execution of the sale deed by the mother and uncle of the appellants in favour of husband of the respondent is admitted and the sale deeds disputed is not disputed by the appellants. Further the LRs of the appellants will also not have any right, title or interest in the compensation or to challenge the said sale deed. The land measuring two bigha held by the Hon'ble court for precautionary measures to meet out the demand of any other plot holder or claimant comes forward is also to be borne by the respondent and the land of the appellants is not within the purview of the said land of 2 bigha held by the court.
7 That the aforesaid settlement has been arrived at between the parties of their own free will and accord and without any outside pressure from any corner whatsoever and the same shall be binding on them as well as their respective legal heirs.
It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that the compromise between the parties may be recorded and the appeal may kindly be decided accordingly.'' 10 The counsel for the petitioners herein has filed the certified copy of the order dt. 29.05.2007 passed by the Hon'ble DB of the High Court of Delhi in the said RFA No.429/2002. It was held by the Hon'ble High Court that :
''Parties have compromised to amicably settle their disputes and have reduced the terms of compromise into writing. The compromise is Exhibit C. It is signed by the parties and their respective counsel, duly supported by the Affidavits of the parties.
We are satisfied that the terms of compromise are lawful. In these circumstances, the application is allowed and the appeal is allowed, as compromised, in terms of Exhibit C.''
11 In view of the aforesaid compromise arrived at between the petitioners and Meenakshi Khurana, and the fact that the petitioners herein have already been held entitled to compensation in respect of the land bearing khasra nos.971/155-160 (0-4), the petitioners herein have got the right, title and interest in respect of the land bearing khasra no.971/155-160 min measuring 4 biswas situate in the village Gharauli, Delhi. This issue is answered accordingly.
ISSUE NOS.2 & 3 12 Both the issues are inter-connected and I shall decide both the issues together. The onus to prove these issues is upon the petitioners and the respondents. The petitioners have sought enhancement in compensation on the aforesaid grounds which are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity. It has been held in various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that while assessing the market value of the land which is sought to be acquired by the government, situation, nature, potential/ user and neighbouring land, etc, is to be considered. In this context, I would prefer to rely upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as well as the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The basic test was laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Dy. Collector & Anr. Vs Kurra Sambasiva Rao & Others, AIR 1997 SC 2625 and it was held that :
''The court is required to keep at the back of its mind that the object of assessment is to arrive at reasonable and adequate market value of the lands. In that process, though some guess work is involved. Feats of imagination should be eschewed and mechanical assessment of the evidence should be avoided. Even in the absence of oral evidence adduced by the Land Acquisition Officer or the beneficiaries, the judges are to draw from their experience the normal human conduct of the parties and bona fide and genuine sale transactions are guiding star in evaluating the evidence. Misplaced sympathies or undue emphasis solely on the claimants right to compensation would place very heavy burden on the public exchequer to which other everyone contributes by direct or indirect taxes'' In Spl. Tehsildar, Land Acqn. Vishakhapatnam Vs Smt. A. Mangala Gowri AIR 1992 Supreme Court 666, it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that :
''In determining the market value of the land, the price paid in sale or purchase of the land acquired within a reasonable time from the date of the acquisition of the land in question would be the best piece of evidence. In its absence the price paid for a land possessing similar advantages to the land in the neighbourhood of the land acquired in or about the time of the notification would supply the date to assess the market value. Where there were bona fide and genuine sale transactions in respect of the same land under acquisition wherein the claimant who was vendee had sold at Rs.5 per sq. yard, the High Court would not be justified in excluding such transactions and placing reliance on award of some other land for awarding compensation at the rate of Rs.10 per sq. yard, within a time lag of nine months from the bona fide transaction by seller.'' In the case of Shakuntalabai (Smt) & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported as (1996) 2 SCC 152 wherein it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that when on record there is evidence of the value of the acquired land itself, then it is unnecessary to travel beyond that evidence and consider the market value prevailing in the adjacent land. The relevant portion of the aforesaid judgment reads as under :
''It is seen that if there is evidence or admission on behalf of the claimants as to the market value commanded by the acquired land itself, the need to travel beyond the boundary of the acquired land is obviated. The need to take into consideration the value of the lands adjacent to the acquired land or near about the area which possessed same potentiality to work out the prices fetched therein for determination of market value of the acquired land would arise only when there is no evidence of the value of the acquired land. In a case where evidence of the value of the acquired land itself is available on record, it is unnecessary to travel beyond that evidence and consider the market value prevailing in the adjacent lands.''
13 In the present reference, the petitioners have sought the enhancement in compensation of the acquired land as on 17.11.1980 i.e. the date of notification U/s 4 of the LA Act relying upon the judgment dt. 09.05.1997 passed by the Ld. ADJ, Delhi in LAC No.20/96 titled Smt.Suman Kumari Pal & Anr Vs UOI & Anr which has been discussed by this reference court in the award/ judgment dt. 02.06.2007 titled Dr.Kanwar Anil Kumar Shah Khurana through his LR Kunwarani Smt.Meenakshi Khurana Vs UOI & Ors. which is Ex.P-2. In the aforesaid judgment dt. 09.05.1997 in the case of Smt.Suman Kumari Pal (Supra), the land situate in village Gharauli, Delhi was acquired vide the same notification dt. 17.11.1980 U/s 4 of the LA Act and the declaration was made U/s 6 of the LA Act on 29.09.1981 vide award no.18/1983-84. The Ld. ADJ, Delhi after considering the materials and the judgments placed on record fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs.76,550/- per bigha as on 17.11.1980. In this context, this reference court has also placed a reliance upon the judgment dt. 11.08.1994 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in RFA No.185/93 titled Karan Singh & Ors Vs UOI 55 (1994) DLT 511; 68 (1997) DLT 900 SC in the aforesaid judgment Ex.P-1. In RFA No.185/1993, the land situate in village Gharauli, Delhi was acquired vide the same notification dt. 17.11.1980 u/s 4 of the LA Act. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi fixed the market value of the land at Rs.76,550/- as on 17.11.1980. This reference court has also assessed the market value at Rs.76,550/- per bigha as on 17.11.1980 in the aforesaid similar reference in LAC No.29/1/07 in the case of Dr.Kanwar Anil Kumar Shah Khurana. Therefore, my decision is also supported with the aforesaid judgments and the petitioners herein are also entitled to enhancement in compensation of the acquired land. Thus, the market value of the land in question is fixed at Rs.76,550/- per bigha as on 17.11.1980. The petitioners have not led any evidence in respect of the claim for severance allowance, therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for the said claim. These issues are answered accordingly.
RELIEF 14 In view of my findings on the above issues, the petitioners are entitled to enhancement in compensation of the land bearing khasra no.971/155-160 (0-4) situate in the village Gharauli, Delhi as per the statement U/s 19 of the LA Act and the market value of the said land is fixed at Rs.76,550/- per bigha as on 17.11.1980. Besides it, the petitioners shall also get 30% solatium on the enhanced market value and interest on the enhanced amount in compensation awarded by this court U/s 28 @ 9% per annum from the date of award or dispossession whichever is earlier till the expiry of one year and thereafter @ 15% per annum till the date of payment. Since the date of the award is after 30.04.1982, the petitioners will also get additional amount of 12% U/s 23(1-A) of the Act as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of K.S.Paripoornan Vs State of Kerela & Ors JT 1994 (6) Supreme Court. The petitioners are further entitled to interest on solatium in terms of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court titled Sunder Vs UOI reported in 93 DLT 2001 (SC) 569. This reference is answered accordingly.
A copy of this award be sent to the concerned LAC to make the payment of the enhanced amount of compensation to the petitioners within three months from today. While making the calculations due regard shall be made to deduct the amount initially arrived at by the LAC to avoid any duplication. There shall be no order as to costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. The file be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in open court ( YASHWANT KUMAR )
on 29.09.2007 ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE (LAC)
DELHI
LAC No. 94/1/07
29.09.2007 (At 04.00 p.m.)
Present- None
Vide separate award dictated and announced in the open court, this reference is answered accordingly.
A copy of this award be sent to the concerned LAC to make the payment of the enhanced amount of compensation to the petitioners within three months from today. While making the calculations due regard shall be made to deduct the amount initially arrived at by the LAC to avoid any duplication. There shall be no order as to costs. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. The file be consigned to Record Room.
( YASHWANT KUMAR ) ADJ/LAC/DELHI/29.09.2007