Delhi District Court
Sh. Raj Kumar - Son vs Union Of India To Be Served Through on 22 September, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV KUMAR:
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE01:
ROHINI COURTS: DELHI.
LAC No.430A/08
UID No.02404C0168512008
IN RE:
SH. RAM PRAKASH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS.
1. SH. RAJ KUMAR - SON
2. SH. RAM KUMAR - SON (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS
i) SMT. PREM - WIDOW
ii) MASTER SUSHIL - SON
iii) MASTER MANISH - SON
3. SH. SHIV KUMAR - SON
4. SH. JAGPAL - SON
ALL R/O VILLAGE & PO KHERA KHURD
NEW DELHI
................PETITIONER
Vs.
1. UNION OF INDIA TO BE SERVED THROUGH
LAC ( N/W), KANJHAWALA, DELHI.
2. DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY, DELHI
............RESPONDENTS
Award No. : 20/0203
Village : Khera Khurd
LAC No. 430A/08 Page 1 of 11
Date of Award/Date of
Announcement of Award : 09.09.2002
Notification U/S 4 : F.10(20)/2000/L&B/LA/6640
dated 07.08.2000
Notification U/S 6 : F.10(20)/2000/L&B/LA/8578
dated 11.09.2000
Date of Receipt of Reference: 18.02.2003
Date of Arguments: 07.09.2011
Date of Judgment: 22.09.2011
REFERENCE PETITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE
LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894
JUDGEMENT
1. A large tract of Land measuring 591 bigha 10 biswa situated in the Revenue state of village Khera Khurd was acquired by the Government vide notification no.F.10(20)/2000/L&B/LA/6640 dated 07.08.2000 under section 4 and 17 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'LA Act'). The Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as LAC) passed the Award bearing no. 20/200203 dated 09.09.02 whereby e determined the market value of category 'A' Land @ Rs. 13.82 lacs per acre and category 'B' Land @ Rs. 12.62 per acre.
2. Being dissatisfied with the said market value the petitioner has LAC No. 430A/08 Page 2 of 11 filed the said present reference u/s 18 of LA Act before LAC who has referred the same to this court.
3. Petitioner has stated in the reference petition that he is recorded bhumidhar of land bearing Khasra no.43/22, 70/1, 2 total measuring 9 bigha and 18 biswas situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Khera Khurd, which was acquired by government and LAC has awarded Rs.13.82 per acre for his category 'A' land and Rs.12.62 for category 'B' land. But LAC has not determined the correct market value as per law.
4. Petitioner has challenged the Award on following grounds.
a) That the LAC has assessed the compensation merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures without looking into the market rate of the land prevailing in the area ;
b) that LAC has failed to consider that land of the petitioner has all modern facilities like developed roads, school, telephone, electricity, Hosiptals, Public Schools, Inter College, Degree College, Health Gym, Sport Stadium Modern, Panchayat Ghar, Most frequently served by the DTC and other Private Transport;
LAC No. 430A/08 Page 3 of 11
c) that LAC has erred in considering that land of petitioner is very near to NH1, Narela Township and West Jamuna Canal flows near to the village Khera Khurd, as a result of which land of petitioner gives three crops in a year;
d) that LAC has failed to consider that the land of petitioner was having all types of amenities like electricity, drainage, etc. and land is fit for industrial purpose.
5. The petitioner has claimed compensation for the land @ Rs.10,000/ per square yards and also claimed Rs.1,00,000 for serving charges and Rs.1,00,000 as damages done. He has also claimed compensation of category 'A' for his entire land.
6. Both the respondents have filed their respective written statement . In the written statement filed on behalf of UOI , it is stated that Delhi Land Reform Act is applicable to the acquired land. On merit all the averments made in the reference petition are denied and it is stated that LAC has awarded adequate and just compensation, therefore, petitioner is not entitled any enhancement in the compensation.
LAC No. 430A/08 Page 4 of 11
7. In the written statement filed on behalf of Respondent no. 2 it is stated that DLR Act is applicable to the land and disputer and further stated that petitioner had not filed any claim u/s 9 & 10 of the LA Act as the present reference is time barred. On merit respondent no. 2 also denied the plea made by the petitioner in his claim petition and further it is stated that compensation awarded by LAC is just and adequate.
8. During the pendency of case, petitioner has expired and his LRs as mentioned in the memorandum were impleaded in his place.
9. During the admission and denial of the documents petitioner has admitted statement u/s 19 of LA Act.
10. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:
1. Whether petitioner is entitled to any enhancement, if so to what amount?
2. Relief.
11. In support of his claim for enhancement of compensation, petitioner has not examined any witness. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has only adopted the evidence led by petitioner in LAC No. 430A/08 Page 5 of 11 case titled as Narender Singh Vs. UOI, LAC No. 53A/09.
12. On the other hand Ld. Counsel for the respondent has tendered the copy of the award as Ex. R1 and also relied upon the evidence led by counsel for UOI in case titled as Narender Singh Vs. UOI LAC No.53A/09.
13. During final arguments Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that market value of the present award has already been determined by Hon'ble Justice Pradeep Nandrajog in case titled as Jai Singh Vs. UOI LA Appeal no. 266/08 and requested that same market value be passed in the present case.
14. Findings of issue no. 1 14.1 Petitioner has stated in the petition that valuation of land determined by LAC is not reasonable as LAC has not adopted the correct method of valuation. Petitioner has not examined any witness only adopted the evidence of Narender Singh Vs. UOI LAC No.53A/09.
14.2 However, during final arguments Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that he relied upon the judgment LAC No. 430A/08 Page 6 of 11 Jai Singh Vs. UOI which is recently decided by Hon'ble Justice Pradeep Nandrajog in LA Appeal no. 266/08 & connected matters dated 23.08.2011, in which Hon'ble Court has determined the market value of the land pertaining to village Khera Khurd acquired through the same award by which land of petitioner has been acquired as Rs.14,83,500/ per acre for category 'A' land and Rs.14,46,413/ per acre for category 'B', hence he prayed that same market value be given to petitioner.
14.3 I have perused the judgment Jai Singh Vs. UOI (Supra). By this judgment, Hon'ble Justice has determined the market value of the land of many villages including the land of village Khera Khurd, acquired through award no. 20/0203. In this case as observed in para 61 of the judgment market value has been determined on the basis of minimum price notified by the govt. and on the basis of sale deed dated 25.05.2002. Para 61 is reproduced as below:
61. I thus hold that pertaining to the notifications dated 7.8.2000, 11.9.2000, 2.5.2001, 22.8.2001 and 7.12.2001 the land prices would have to be determined on the basis of the minimum price notified by the Government LAC No. 430A/08 Page 7 of 11 as also with reference to the sale deed dated 25.5.2002 for the reason I find no other cogent evidence wherefrom land price as on said dates could be determined. Pertaining to the notifications dated 16.5.2002, 23.5.2002 and 27.1.2003, the land price needs to be determined with respect to the sale deed dated 25.5.2002 because with reference to the said sale price it is apparent that land price as of said date comes to more than if determined with respect to the notification dated 9.8.2001 wherein minimum land price notified was Rs.15.7 lakhs per acre with effect from 1.4.2001.
14.4 Thereafter in para 70 Hon'ble Justice has determined the market value of village Khera Khurd. Relevant para is reproduced below:
Village Khera Khura Notification dated 11.9.2000
70. With reference to the notification dated 9.8.2001 wherein with effect from 1.4.2000 minimum price notified per acre is Rs.13.82 lakhs per acre and requiring said price to be suitably updated to reach the date of the notification i.e. 11.9.2000 and with reference to the sale deed dated 25.5.2002 wherein for Category 'C' lands, land price per acre comes to Rs.17,74,109/, rounded off to Rs.17,75,000/ per acre, and for Category 'B' lands increasing the same by 2.5% the price comes to Rs.18.2 lakhs per acre and further increasing by 2.5% the prices comes to Rs.18,65,500/ per acre for Category 'A' lands; and decreasing the said prices by 11% to reflect the price with reference to the sale deed for the date 11.9.2000; the mean average price for Category 'A' lands in village Khera Khurd comes to Rs.14,83,500/ per acre and decreasing the same by 2.5%, it comes to Rs.14,46,413/ per acre for Category 'B' lands.
71. All Land Acquisition Appeals as per 'GRIDD' filed by LAC No. 430A/08 Page 8 of 11 the land owners and crossobjections filed by the land owners in appeals filed by Union of India are allowed by decreeing compensation payable for Category 'A' lands in village Khera Khurd pertaining to the notification dated 11.9.2000 in sum of Rs.14,83,500/ per acre for Category 'A' lands and Rs.14,46,413/ per acre for Category 'B' lands. I note that pertaining to this notification and the village, the Union of India has not filed any appeal. On the enhanced compensation statutory benefits as per the Land Acquisition Act 1894 as explained in the judgment reported as Sunder Vs. UOI 2001 (93) DLT 569 shall be granted, except for the period where there is a delay in filing the appeal, for which period of delay no interest on the enhanced compensation shall be paid. These appellants would be entitled to proportionate cost.
However, on perusal of said para I found that due to typological error date of notification u/s 4 been taken as 11.09.2000 instead on 07.08.2000, which is apparent from the award Ex.R1. It has resulted into determination of excess market value as Rs.14,83,500/ per acre for category A and Rs.14,46,413/ per acre for category 'B' instead of Rs.14,75,000/ per acre for category 'A' and Rs.14,37,280/ per acre for category 'B' as determined by Hon'ble High Court in case of village Pooth Kalan, Holambi Kalan and Bawana acquired through notification dated 07.08.2000. Therefore, I am of the view that petitioner cannot be given advantage of the LAC No. 430A/08 Page 9 of 11 human error and cannot be given market value @ Rs.14,83,500/ per acre for category A and Rs.14,46,413/ per acre for category 'B' which is determined by the Hon'ble Judge under the presumption that date of notification u/s 4 is 11.09.2000. Hence, I determine the market value of petitioner's land @ Rs.14,75,000/ per acre for category 'A' and Rs.14,37,280/ per acre for category 'B' as determined by the Hon'ble High Court for the village Pooth Khurd, Holambi Kalan, and Bawana as in the abovesaid judgment.
15. 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. Issue no.1 decided accordingly.
16. Findings on Issue No.2 - RELIEF 16.1 In view of the findings on Issue no.1, the petitioner is entitled to the following reliefs:
a) that market value of the petitioner's land is LAC No. 430A/08 Page 10 of 11 determined @ Rs.14,75,000/ per acre for category 'A' and Rs.14,37,280/ per acre for category 'B' for his land as mentioned in statement u/s 19 LA Act ;
b) additional amount u/s 23 (1A) @ 12% p.a., on the enhanced compensation from the date of notification u/s 4 of the LA Act till the date of award or dispossession, whichever is earlier ;
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 ;
17. Reference is disposed of accordingly. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court (SANJEEV KUMAR)
on 22.09.2011 ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE01
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
LAC No. 430A/08 Page 11 of 11