Delhi District Court
Sh. Vijay Kumar vs Union Of India Through on 8 April, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV KUMAR:
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE : ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
LAC No.279A/08
UID 02404C007892008
IN RE :
1. SH. VIJAY KUMAR
2. SH. SATISH
BOTH SS/O SH. JAGAT SINGH
R/O VPO HOLAMBI KALAN
...... PETITIONERS
Versus
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR,
NORTH WEST,
DELHI.
2. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
VIKAS SADAN, DELHI (DDA)
........RESPONDENTS
Award No. 33/200304
Village HOLAMBI KALAN
Date of Award/ Date of
Announcement of Award 31.03.2004
Notification U/S 4 F.10(4)/97/L&B/LA/7329
dt. 22.08.2001
Corrigendum F.10(4)/97/L&B/LA/5148
LAC No. 279A/08 Page 1 of 12
dt. 26.06.2002
Notification U/s 6 F.10(4)/97/L&B/LA/7910
dt. 26.07.2002
Date of Receipt of Reference : 06.02.2008
Date of Arguments : 31.03.2011
Date of Decision: 08.04.2011
REFERENCE PETITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE
LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894
J U D G M E N T
1. This reference under section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called as LA Act), was sent to the reference court by the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred as LAC).
2. A large tract of Land measuring 1094 bigha 17 biswa of village Holambi Kalan, Delhi, was acquired by the Govt. for "development of Freight Complex at Narela under planned Development of Delhi". Notification under Section 4 of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'LA Act') was issued on 22.08.2001 and corrigendum was issued on 26.06.2002. Declaration under Section 6 was made on 26.07.2002; Thereafter, Award bearing no. 33/2003 LAC No. 279A/08 Page 2 of 12 04 was announced by Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as LAC) on 31.03.2004. The LAC determined the market price of the acquired land as Rs.15,70,000/ per acre.
3. The brief facts as stated in the reference are that petitioners were the owner/bhumidar of 1/25 share each in land bearing khasra no.50//15(416), 51//11/1M(012) total land measuring 5 bigha 8 biswa, situated within the Revenue Estate of Village Holambi Kalan, Delhi (the said land). The said land was acquired by Govt. and LAC has passed the award granting Rs.15,70,000/ per acre as market value to the petitioner. Being dissatisfied to the said value he challanged the award by filing the reference u/s 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
4. The petitioners have challenged the said award on the following grounds :
i) that LAC had not adopted the correct method of valuation; and determined the market value on the basis of policy of the Government of NCT, fixing indicative price of the agricultural land @ Rs.15,70 lac for the purposes of acquisition in the entire Delhi whereas price of land should have been assessed considering the situation and potentiality of land;
ii) that market value of the acquired land cannot be so fixed and LAC No. 279A/08 Page 3 of 12 should be assessed as per provisions of section 23 and 24 of LA Act, 1984;
iii) that LAC has failed to consider the present physical and existing development in and around the land of the petitioner;
iv) that DDA has increased the rate of alternative plots from Rs.750/ per sq. yards to Rs.4,000/ per sq. yards.
v) that LAC has failed to consider that land of the petitioner is very fertile and leveled and gives 23 commercial crops in a year;
vi) that the land of the petitioners is adjacent to various already developed area and village abadi and all the civic facilities like water, electricity, metalled roads, general market, post office, transport facilities, banking facility, hospitals, Higher Secondary Schools, collage, fire station, telephone exchange, Narela Railway Station, police Station, very near to GTK Road, Khampur Radio Station, Narela Anaj Mandi adjacent to the Narela Township. Thus land of the petitioner has great future potentiality to be used for commercial, industrial or residential purposes ;
vii) that LAC has failed to appreciate that around the land of petitioners many palatial farm houses have been developed and constructed in the revenue estate of village Narela and adjoining LAC No. 279A/08 Page 4 of 12 villages and cost of such farm houses is not less than Rs.15,000/ per sq. yards.
5. The petitioners have claimed compensation of his land at the rate of Rs.10,000/ per sq. yards. Besides this he claimed compensation of Rs.5,000/ each for loss and damages sustained by her on account trees, Rs.1,00,000 for damages done to standing crops and Rs.2,00,000/ each for well.
6. The reference petition was contested by Union of India (hereinafter referred to as 'UOI') as well as Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "DDA").
7. Both the respondents have filed their written statement, in which they had taken many objections to the claim filed by the petitioners. In its written statement filed on behalf of respondent no. 1/UOI it is stated that land of petitioner was not surrounded by developed or under developed colonies and can only be used for agricultural purpose and Delhi Land Reform Act was applicable to the said land. It is further stated that compensation awarded by LAC is fair, reasonable and adequate on the basis of market rate and petitioner is not entitle to any enhancement in the compensation awarded by the LAC No. 279A/08 Page 5 of 12 LAC.
8. In WS of Respondent no. 2/DDA, it is denied that land of the petitioner is adjacent to the developed area. It was further denied that at the time of notification u/s 4 market value of the land in the area was Rs.10,000/ per sq. yards. It is further stated that LAC has awarded the just and adequate compensation after taking into consideration all the facts relevant for determining the compensation and as such petitioner is not entitle to any enhancement in the compensation.
9. During the admissiondenial of documents, petitioner has admitted statement u/s 19 of Land Acquisition Act sent by LAC.
10. After the completion of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to any enhancement in compensation. If so, to what amount ?
2. Relief.
11. In support of his claim for enhancement of compensation, petitioners have only adopted the evidence led in case titled as Ashok Kumar LAC No. 279A/08 Page 6 of 12 Vs. UOI LAC No. 199A/09.
12. On the other hand Ld. Counsel for the respondents have tendered the copy of the award as Ex. R1 and also adopted the evidence led by respondents in case tiled as Ashok Kumar Vs. UOI.
13. I have heard the arguments and gone through the record. After going through the case file my issue wise finding are as under:
14. Findings of issue no. 1 14.1 Petitioner's counsel has contended that valuation of land determined by LAC is not reasonable as LAC has not adopted the correct method of valuation. However, petitioners have not examined any witness to support his case for enhancement in compensation, only adopted the evidence of Ashok Kumar Vs. UOI Vs. UOI LAC No.199A/09 which was decided by this court on 12.01.2011. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner argued that Ashok Kumar Vs. UOI (Supra) pertained to the same village, same notifications and same award by which the land of the present petitioner is acquired. Hence, same market value of petitioner's land be determined. On perusal of said judgment, I found that I had determined the LAC No. 279A/08 Page 7 of 12 market value @ Rs.16,43,811/ per acre. In that case I have observed in para 19 which is reproduced as under:
19. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has also contended that LAC has determined the market value on the basis of govt. policy of fixing minimum rate of agriculture land dt. 09.08.2001. In the said policy minimum rate was fixed @ Rs.15,70,000/ which made effective from 01.04.2001, where as notification u/s 4 was issued on 22.08.2001 but the LAC has not granted any compensation for the price rise for the intervening period 01.04.2001 to 22.08.2001 Ld. Counsel has contended that 12% increase should be given for the intervening period.
19.1 On the other hand Ld. Counsel for the respondent has contended that since Rs.15,70,000/ is determined by the LAC is fair compensation therefore, petitioner is not entitle to any enhancement.
19.2 On going through the award, in para 2nd of page 22 LAC has mentioned that "In a policy announcement which came into effect from the financial year 20012002, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi fixed the indicative prices of agricultural land @ LAC No. 279A/08 Page 8 of 12 Rs.15,70,000.00 per acre for the acquisition of agricultural land vide their order No. F.9(20)/80/L&B/LA6696 dated 09.08.2001 which are applicable with effect from 01.04.2001. The notification under section 4 was issued on 22.08.2001 and the price of the land is to be determined as on the date of notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act itself. Hence, in view of the above facts I find Rs.15,70,000.00 per acre to be the most reasonable price for the agricultural land as on 22.08.2001. I accordingly, determine the market value of the agricultural land @ Rs.15,70,000.00 per acre."
Thus from the perusal of award it is apparent that minimum rates of agricultural land made applicable from 01.04.2001, whereas in case notification u/s 4 was issued on 22.08.2001. I found force in the contention of Ld. Counsel for the petitioner that atleast petitioner is entitle to escalation for the intervening period i.e. from the date when the Government policy become effective till the date of notification u/s 4 of the LA Act i.e. 01.04.2001 to 22.08.2001. There are numerous judgment which fortify my this view, in Mahinder Singh Vs. UOI Hon'ble High Court has awarded 11.5% compound interest for the LAC No. 279A/08 Page 9 of 12 intervening period between two notification where as in recently in Partap Singh Vs. UOI LA Appeal no. 780/2008 dated 19.12.2008 Hon'ble High Court has granted 12% increase for the intervening period between two sale deed since gap was about 10 months approx. Similarly in Bedi Ram & Ors. Vs. UOI and Ors. 93(2001) DLT 150, 12% increase has been given by the High Court. Considering all these judgment I am of the view that it would be justified to give increase @ 12% for the intervening period between the date of government policy & notification u/s 4 of LA Act (i.e. 01.04.2001 to 22.08.2001 = 143 days) it comes to Rs.16,43,811/ per acre. Thus petitioner get an enhancement of Rs.73,811 per acre
15. Since both the parties have relied upon the evidence led in case titled as Ashok KumarVs. UOI (supra), I find no justification to differ from the said judgment. Hence, I determine the market value @ Rs.16,43,811/ per acre. Thus giving an enhancement of Rs.73,811 per acre.
16. I summarise the issue no. 1 as follows:
LAC No. 279A/08 Page 10 of 12
a) that petitioner shall be entitle to market value at the rate of its Rs.16,43,811/ thus getting an enhancement of Rs.73,811/ per acre;
Issue no. 1 decided accordingly.
17. Besides above, petitioner shall be entitled to other statutory benefit i.e 12% Addl. Amount as per section 23 (1) A & 30% solatium u/s 23 (2) & will be entitle to interest on the market value @ 9% per annum for the first year & 15% for subsequent year till the making of payment of enhanced compensation by LAC as per provision of Section 28 of the Act.
18. Findings on Issue No.2 - RELIEF 18.1 In view of the findings on Issue no.1, the petitioners are entitled to the following reliefs:
a) enhancement in compensation from Rs.15,70,000 per acre to Rs.16,43,811 per acre i.e. enhancement @ Rs.73,811/ per acre for the land as per statement u/s 19 LA Act ;
b) additional amount u/s 23 (1A) @ 12% p.a., on the market value from the date of notification u/s 4 of the LA Act till the date of award or dispossession, whichever is earlier ; LAC No. 279A/08 Page 11 of 12
c) solatium u/s 23(2) of LA Act @ 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation ;
d) interest under Section 28 of L.A Act at the rate of 9% per annum for the first year from the date of dispossession and at the rate of 15% per annum on the difference between the enhanced compensation awarded by this court and the compensation awarded by the LAC for the subsequent period till its payment ;
18.2 Reference is disposed of accordingly. 18.3 Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. A copy of the judgment be sent to LAC for necessary action.
18.4 File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (SANJEEV KUMAR) today on 08.04.2011 ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE01:
DELHI LAC No. 279A/08 Page 12 of 12