Delhi District Court
Nand Lal & Ors vs . Uoi & Anr. Page 1 Of 15 on 14 May, 2019
LAC No.133/2016
IN THE COURT OF SH. NIKHIL CHOPRA, ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE,
ROOM NO. 606, SAKET COURTS, SOUTH DISTRICT,
NEW DELHI
In the matter of
LAC No.133/2016
Filing No.25608/2015
CNR No. DLST010020132015
1. Nand Lal (Deceased)
S/o Sh. Ram Nath
Through his legal heirs:
(a) Khem Chand (son)
(b) Vijay Singh (son)
(c) Surat Singh (Deceased) (son)
Through his legal heirs:
(A) Amar Singh (Deceased) (son)
Through his legal heirs:
(i) Smt. Pushpa (widow)
(ii) Ridhi (daughter)
(iii) Master Manav (son)
(B) Rajesh Kumari (daughter)
(C) Babita (daughter)
(D) Seema (daughter)
(E) Anita (daughter)
(d) Karan Singh (son)
(e) Laxman Singh (son)
2. Attar Singh (Deceased)
S/o Sh. Mangtu
Through his legal heirs:
(a) Manbir Singh (son)
(3) Ishwar Singh (Deceased)
Through his legal heirs:
(a) Kamla Devi (widow)
(b) Manoj Kumar (son)
(c) Azad Singh (son)
Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 1 of 15
LAC No.133/2016
(d) Naresh Kumar (son)
(e) Nirlep Kaur (daughter)
(4) Randhir Singh (Deceased)
Through his legal heirs:
(a) Maya Devi (widow)
(b) Vikram Mehlawat (son)
(c) Deepak (son)
(d) Babita Malik (daughter)
(e) Geeta Rana (daughter)
5. Lachhman Singh (died unmarried)
6. Pehlad Singh
S/o Mangtu
(Petitioner No.2 & 4, 6 and legal heirs of
3 are the legal heirs of petitioner No.5)
7. Prithi Singh
S/o Sh. Devi Singh
8. Mitter Lal
S/o Devi Singh
9. Mahesh Lal
S/o Uddal Singh
10. Joginder Singh
S/o Uddal Singh
All:
R/o Village Kishangarh,
Mehrauli, New Delhi
...................... Petitioners
VERSUS
1. Union of India
Through the Land Acquisition Collector,
M. B. Road, Saket, New Delhi
2. Delhi Development Authority
Through its Vice Chairman
Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi
Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 2 of 15
LAC No.133/2016
.....................Respondents
Reference received on : 08.06.1984
Date of institution : 08.06.1984
Date on which order was reserved : 14.05.2019
Date of Award : 14.05.2019
AWARD
(by the court under Section 26 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on reference petition under Section 18 of the Act, 1894)
1. The present reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was received from the office of Land Acquisition Collector on an application moved by the petitioners, who have sought enhancement of the monetary award given by the Land Acquisition Collector on the ground that the assessment of the market value of the acquired land was done on the lower side without considering the relevant factors for correctly assessing the market value of the land in question. The reference was received from the office of LAC (South) on 08.06.1984.
For answering the present reference petition, the relevant dates, features and facts are given below:
i. Date of Notification under Section 4 23.01.1965 of the Act iia. Date of Notification under Section 6 07.12.1966 of the Act Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 3 of 15 LAC No.133/2016 iib. Date of Notification under Section Nil 17 of the Act iii Project Planned Development of Delhi iv. Location/Name of Village Mehrauli va Award Number under Section 11 of 80F/197071 the Act by LAC and date of Award 08.08.1983 vb Area under acquisitionin question 93 bigha 2 biswa vi Petition referred to Court on 08.06.1984
2. The present reference under Section 18 of the L. A. Act pertains to the award announced by LAC for acquisition of land situated in village Mehrauli which was acquired for the public purpose of 'Planned Development of Delhi'. The land in question was acquired by the LAC vide award No.80F/197071 dated 08.08.1983 pursuant to preliminary notification under Section 4 of the Act dated 23.01.1965 which was followed up by notification under Section 6 of the Act on 07.12.1966.
3. The Land Acquisition Collector (in brief LAC) after considering the relevant factors, gave its Award No.80F/197071 by determining the compensation for the compulsory acquisition @ Rs.1700/ per bigha.
4. Since the petitioners did not accept the award, they preferred a reference application under Section 18 of the Act, 1894 before the Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi. The reference Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 4 of 15 LAC No.133/2016 filed by the petitioners along with statement under Section 19 of the Act, 1894 (giving details of the acquired area, date of notification under Section 4 of the L. A. Act, date of possession, rates of compensation, and the share of the petitioners in the acquired land) has been sent to the Court by the Land Acquisition Collector for answering the same.
5. It is pertinent to mention here that vide order dated 01.02.2001, an application moved under Order XXII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was allowed. Thereafter, vide order dated 10.09.2002, application moved on behalf of the legal heirs of petitioner Nand Lal was allowed on the basis of Will dated 09.12.1982 and sons of Late Nand Lal were brought on record. Subsequent thereto, vide order dated 27.04.2004, the present reference was adjourned sine die in view of the fact that reference under Section 3031 of the L. A. Act was pending disposal. Subsequently, on 28.07.2015, application moved by Vijay Singh i.e. legal heir of petitioner Nand Lal was allowed and the reference was restored to its original number. On 08.12.2015, applications moved by the legal heirs of Ishwar Singh & Surat Singh (who in turn was legal heir of original petitioner Nand Lal), were allowed and they were brought on record. Vide order dated 17.05.2016, applications moved under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 were allowed and respondent No.22 to 30 were transposed as Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 5 of 15 LAC No.133/2016 petitioner No.2 to 10, in view of the judgment dated 30.04.2010 passed in the reference under Order 3031 of the L. A. Act.
Further, Sh. Attar Singh, Sh. Ishwar Singh, Sh. Randhir Singh and Sh. Pahlad Singh were impleaded in place of respondent No.25 Laxman (since expired). On 05.07.2017, Manvir Singh i.e. legal heir of Sh. Attar Singh was brought on record on the basis of a registered Will.
6. On 03.04.2019, application moved on behalf of the legal heirs of Randhir Singh was allowed and they were brought on record.
PETITIONER'S CASE
7. Reference filed by petitioner No.1 Nand Lal was forwarded by the LAC with the claim of the petitioner to the effect that he was bhumidar and in possession of land bearing old Khasra Nos.1266 (2203), 1286 (1217), 1296 (113), 1297 (800), and 1299 (3819) situated in Village Mehrauli to the extent of ¼th share; that the LAC at the time of assessment of the market value of the land in question did not consider the potentiality of the same which was not less than Rs.500/ per sq. yds since the same could be used for commercial & residential purposes; that petitioners' land was situated in the neighbourhood of Jawaharlal Nehru University Complex, IIT and other colonies;
Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 6 of 15 LAC No.133/2016and that all the civic amenities were available at the land in question. Consequently, by way of present reference, petitioners have prayed for grant of compensation @ Rs.300/ per sq. yd. along with other statutory benefits as well as for grant of damages @ Rs.1,00,000/.
RESPONDENTS' CASE On behalf of UOI/respondent No.1
8. No written statement was filed on behalf of the UOI.
On behalf of the DDA/respondent No.2
9. DDA in its Written Statement submitted that the LAC had correctly and adequately assessed the market value of the acquired land; and that the land in question was not surrounded by developed colonies. On merits, the Reference claim was denied and prayer for dismissal of the same was made.
ISSUES
10. On 16.08.2016, following issues were framed by the Learned Predecessor Judge for answering the present reference:
1. Whether Reference Petition under Section 18 Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 7 of 15 LAC No.133/2016 of the Land Acquisition Act is within prescribed period of limitation?Onus on Parties
2. What was the market value of land acquired, on the date of preliminary notification dated 23.01.1965 under Section 4 of the Act 1894? OPP
3. Whether the petitioners are entitled for enhanced compensation, as prayed? OPP
4. Relief EVIDENCE ADDUCED On behalf of the petitioner
11. Petitioners in order to prove their claim for enhanced compensation, examined Sh. Vijay Singh S/o Late Sh. Nand Lal i.e. petitioner No.1(b) as PW1 who led his evidence by way of affidavit Ex.PW1/A and relied on the following documents:
1. Copy of the Award No.80F/197071 dated 08.08.1983 as Ex.PW1/1;
2. Copy of Reference Petition as Ex.PW1/2;
3. Copy of the order dated 25.08.2010 in LAC No.5/2008 titled as UOI vs. Nand Lal & Ors. As Ex.PW1/3;Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 8 of 15 LAC No.133/2016
4. Copy of order dated 24.09.2014 as Ex.PW1/4; and
5. Copy of the judgment dated 07.04.1998 (17.04.1998) passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi as Ex.PW1/5.
12. PW1 deposed on the lines of the reference under Section 18 of the L. A. Act. During his cross examination, PW1 submitted that reference under Section 18 of the L. A. Act was revived on 28.07.2016 on his application; that Nand Lal was his father who filed the reference under Section 18 of the L. A. Act; that his father used to sow vegetables and wheat but did not maintain any account for the same; that his father and Mani Ram had no dispute regarding the land in question (voluntarily added that his father and Mani Ram had ¼th share each in the land in question; and that he had personal knowledge about the judgments relied upon by him.
No further evidence was led and the same was closed on 27.03.2018.
On behalf of the respondents
13. In evidence, on behalf UOI/respondent No.1, statement of Sh. S. K. Puri, Learned counsel for UOI was recorded whereby he Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 9 of 15 LAC No.133/2016 exhibited the Award No.80f/197071 Village Mehrauli as Ex.R1.
14. On behalf of DDA/respondent No.2, Ms. Sudesh Sharma, Learned counsel for the DDA adopted the evidence led by UOI.
No other witness was examined by the respondents.
FINDINGS
15. The Court gave a patient hearing to the arguments addressed on behalf of the parties, and has also minutely gone through the pleadings on record and the evidence adduced.
16. After giving due consideration to all of the above, the issuewise findings are as follows:
ISSUE NO.1 Whether Reference Petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act is within prescribed period of limitation?Onus on Parties
17. The onus to prove this issue was on the parties. Petitioners their evidence relied on the Award No.80F/197071 dated 08.08.1983 as well as reference petition under Section 18 of the L. A. Act filed before the LAC.
Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 10 of 15 LAC No.133/2016
18. The reference under Section 18 of the L. A. Act was filed by the petitioners before the LAC on 13.9.1983 and the Award was passed on 08.08.1983 which is well within the statutory period of limitation.
19. Consequently, this issue stands decided in favour of the petitioners.
ISSUE NO.2 What was the market value of land acquired, on the date of preliminary notification dated 12.05.1969 under Section 4 of the Act 1894? OPP
20. The onus to prove this issue was on the petitioners.
21. Petitioners, in order to prove this issue, placed reliance on the judgment dated 17.04.1998 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in RFA No.186/1986 titled as Nand Kishore vs. UOI & Anr. Ex.PW1/5 and judgment dated 24.09.2014 passed by the Learned Predecessor Judge in the case titled as Mani Ram vs. UOI & Ors. bearing LAC No.310/93 Ex.PW1/4. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide its judgment assessed the market value of the land of Village Mehrauli acquired vide notification under Section 4 of the L. A. Act dated 23.01.1965 @ Rs.16,000/ per bigha alongwith other statutory benefits.
Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 11 of 15 LAC No.133/2016
22. Learned Predecessor Judge, vide its judgment dated 24.09.2014 by relying on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi (Supra), had also assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs.16,000/ per bigha. So far as the present reference is concerned, the notification under Section 4 of the L. A. Act was issued on 23.01.1965 which is similar to the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the L. A. Act in the the relied upon cases. And even the land in the present reference as well as in the relied upon judgment was of the same Village i.e. Village Mehrauli and even the purpose of acquisition was the same i.e. Planned Development of Delhi. Consequently, the relied upon judgments squarely covers the present reference.
23. I have gone through the judgments Ex.PW1/4 & Ex.PW1/5 whereby the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has assessed the market value of the land of Village Mehrauli @ Rs.16,000/ per bigha. The date of notification under Section 4 of the L. A. Act as well as the purpose of acquisition are similar to Ex.PW1/4 & Ex.PW1/5. Consequently, the present reference can be said to be covered by the judgment passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi Ex.PW1/5 as well as the judgment passed by Learned Predecessor Judge Ex.PW1/4.
24. On the other hand, Respondents in their evidence, only proved the award passed by LAC as R1. No evidence was led by respondents to controvert the judgments relied upon by Learned Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 12 of 15 LAC No.133/2016 counsel for the petitioners.
25. Consequently, it can be safely held that market value of the acquired land in the present reference cannot be less than as assessed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in RFA No.186/1986 titled as Nand Kishore vs. UOI & Anr. since lands under both the references were acquired for a common public purpose, and variance in situation of acquired lands would not make much of a difference. Accordingly, on the basis of above discussion as well as judgments Ex.PW1/4 & Ex.PW1/5, the petitioners are held entitled for enhanced compensation @ Rs.16,000/ per bigha. Consequently, this issue is decided in favour of the petitioners.
ISSUE NO.3 Whether the petitioners are entitled for enhanced compensation, as prayed? OPP
26. The onus to prove this issue was also on the petitioners. Petitioners in support of their claim over the enhanced compensation relied on the judgment dated 30.04.2010 passed by the Learned Predecessor Judge in the reference under Section 3031 of the L. A. Act on the basis of which certain respondents i.e. respondent No.76 to 84 were transposed as petitioner No.2 Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 13 of 15 LAC No.133/2016 to 10 and names of respondent No.2 to 75 were deleted from the array of parties. In view of the above, this issue is decided in favour of the petitioners by holding that they shall be entitled to receive the enhanced compensation @ Rs.16,000/ per bigha, as per their shares.
RELIEF
27. In view of the above discussion, the petitioners are held entitled to enhanced compensation @ Rs.16,000/ per bigha with respect to the land acquired as mentioned in the statement under Section 19 of the Act, 1894 alongwith 30% solatium under Section 23(2) of Act, in lieu of compulsory acquisition of land; 9% interest on excess amount awarded by court from the date of possession of land for period upto one year; and 15% per annum interest on such excess amount for subsequent period till amount is deposited in court under Section 28 of the Act. However, legal heirs of Sh Surat Singh S/o Late Sh. Nand Lal are held not entitled to interest from 16.03.2009 to 22.07.2014.
28. Further, petitioners are also held entitled for other benefits allowed in the Award by Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi. The compensation will be disbursed to petitioners as per the statement under Section 19 of the Act, 1894.
29. The reference petition stands answered as above. Both the Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 14 of 15 LAC No.133/2016 sides will bear their own costs. Memo of costs be drawn accordingly. A copy of this Award be sent to Land Acquisition Collector, South District, Delhi, for necessary information, action and immediate compliance on his part for remitting of amount payable to the petitioners. Thereafter, file be consigned to record room after necessary compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN (NIKHIL CHOPRA)
COURT ON 14.05.2019 ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE02
SOUTH DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS,
NEW DELHI
Nand Lal & Ors vs. UOI & Anr. Page 15 of
15