Punjab-Haryana High Court
The State Of Haryana vs Escorts Dealers Development ... on 26 November, 1993
Equivalent citations: (1993)105PLR466
JUDGMENT N.C. Jain, J.
1. This judgment of mine would dispose of Regular First Appeal No. 253 of 1992 filed by the State of Haryana and Cross-objections No. 24-C of 1992 filed by the landowner.
2. The State of Haryana by issuance of a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') acquired 3.59 acres of land on July 30, 1987. The land is situated in village Mawla Majarajpur and the same has been acquired for the purpose of constructing link road from Delhi-Mathura road to Sector 46 of the Faridabad-Ballabgarh controlled area under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977.
3. The aforesaid land included 11 Kanals 13 Marlas of land which is equivalent to 7048.25 square yards of the cross objectors. In this case, this Court is only concerned with the evaluation of the afore-mentioned land of the cross-objectors. The Land Acquisition Collector passed award dated 5.3.1990 and assessed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 90,000/- per acre. For the structures, it was observed by the Land Acquisition Collector that a supplementary award would be given.
4. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the Additional District Judge, Faridabad has evaluated the land of the Cross-objectors at Rs. 300/- per square yard primarily on the ground that the appellant purchased the disputed land for a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/-.
5. Mr. M.L. Sarin, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the Cross-objectors has argued that his client is entitled to the grant of that much price which he paid for the purchase of the disputed land. He has further argued that since the acquisition in the present case has taken place on 30th July, 1987 i.e. after a period of about 32 months from the date of sale deed, he is entitled to an increase of 12 per cent per annum on account of time lag between the date of the sale deed and the notification under Section 4 of the Act in view of the law laid down by this Court in Inder Singh v. Punjab State, (1988-2)P.L.R. 190.
6. The argument of Mr. Sarin is well merited. It has remained un-disputed before me that the cross-objectors did purchase the land in dispute for Rupees 15,00,000/-. The perusal of Exhibits P.W.7/A shows that a further sum of Rs. 2,17,500/- was paid towards stamp papers, registration charges and the complex charges. The expense incurred by the Cross-objectors on other items has also been proved by Exhibits P.8 and P.9. The findings in this respect recorded by the Additional District Judge that the Cross-objectors have incurred an expenditure of Rs. 18,00.826/- is borne out from the evidence on record and has not been challenged by either parties. When calculated in terms of the square yard, the price comes to Rupees 255.49. The landowner is entitled to enhancement of 12 per cent per annum for the price rise in view of the law laid down in Inder Singh's case (supra). While giving the necessary premium of 12 per cent per annum for the period of 32 months, the price per square yard in the case of acquisition of land of the Cross-objectors comes to Rs. 337.20 per square yard.
7. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal filed by the State of Haryana is dismissed with no order as to costs whereas the Cross-objectors filed by Escorts Dealers -Cross-Objectors are allowed to the extent indicated above with proportionate costs. They are also held entitled to the benefits of the amended provisions of Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act.