Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana Through Collector, ... vs Neelam on 4 November, 2022
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -1-
other connected cases
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
RFA-21-2018 (O&M)
Reserved on: 21.10.2022
Date of decision: 04.11.2022
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ..Appellants
Versus
NEELAM ..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
Present: Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Harsh Vardhan, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate
for the landowners.
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
1. Introduction and background:
1.1 While praying for the modification of the market value assessed in Reference Court's award, the landowners as well as the State of Haryana have filed this batch of appeals and a cross-objection bearing No.XOBJR-
127-2021 (details whereof are at the foot of the judgment) has been filed.
The notification under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1894 Act') and the awards passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as 'the LAC') as well as the Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as 'the RC'), are common. The learned counsel representing the parties are ad idem that this batch of appeals along with a cross-objection bearing No. XOBJR-127-2021, can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment.
For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
1 of 10 ::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:35 ::: RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -2- other connected cases 1.2 The relevant particulars of this batch of appeals, in brief, are as under:
Sr. Particulars Relevant Date No.
1. Preliminary notification 15.03.2011 proposing to acquire land measuring 74 kanals and 15 marlas located in village Kharkhara under Section 4 of the 1894 Act was issued for a public purpose namely for widening and for four-laning of Major District Road-129 from Narnaul to Khudana.
2. Declaration under Section 6 15.07.2011 was issued.
3. Vide award No.36, the LAC 26.10.2012 offered to pay the market value with all the statutory benefits of the acquired land measuring 74 kanals and 15 marlas at the rate of Rs.30,00,000/- per acre.
4. The RC while disposing of as 22.11.2016 many as 31 reference petitions, has assessed the market value with all the statutory benefits at the rate of Rs.38,72,000/- per acre.
FACTS:
1.3 Dissatisfied with the amount offered by the LAC, on the applications filed by the landowners under Section 18 of the 1894 Act, the cases were referred to the RC for redetermination of amount. The landowners claimed that their precious land with market value at the rate of Rs.5,00,00,000/- per acre having potential to be used for residential and commercial purpose has been involuntarily taken away. 1.4 On the other hand, while contesting the petitions, the State of Haryana claims that the LAC has offered just, fair and adequate market value.
For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
2 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -3-
other connected cases
2. Evidence produced by the respective parties:
2.1 In the oral evidence, the landowners examined the following witnesses:-
PW1 Saneh Lata
PW2 Neelam
PW3 Rajesh
PW4 Rajesh
PW5 Rajender
PW6 Paras Ram
2.2 In the documentary evidence, the following documents were
produced by the landowners (apart from the sale deeds, a tabulated compilation of which is provided in para 4.2 of the judgment ):-
Ex.P-1, Ex.P-3 to Copies of the statements Ex.P-6 and Ex.P6A No.19 of the 1894 Act.
to Ex.P-25 2.3 On the other hand, the State of Haryana in their oral evidence examined RW-1 Sh. Sajan Singh, the Sub-Divisional Engineer. 2.4 In the documentary evidence, the State of Haryana produced the following documents:-
Ex.RW1/B to Copies of sale deeds Ex.RW1/F Ex.RW1/G to Copies of mutations Ex.RW1/L Ex.RW1/M Copy of jamabandi for the year 2013- 2014 Ex.RW/N Copy of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act Ex.RW1/O Rate list fixed by the Committee Ex.RW1/P1 aks-shijra (Revenue layout plan) For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
3 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -4-
other connected cases
3. Analysis of the RC's award by the Court:
3.1 The RC, on the appreciation of the pleadings, culled out the following issues for determination:-
"1. What was the market value of the acquired land on the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act? OPP
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to any enhanced compensation, if so, at what rate? OPP
3. Whether the petitioners are entitled to get compensation on account of superstructures trees etc? OPP
4. Relief."
3.2 The RC while relying upon the sale deed Ex.PB bearing No.2153, (dated 29.11.2010), in respect to the parcel of a tiny plot measuring 9 marlas, has assessed the market value of the land by applying deduction of 20% on account of disparity in the size of the plot represented by sale deed Ex.PB bearing No.2153, when compared with the acquired land. Thus, the RC has assessed the market value at Rs.38,72,000/- per acre.
The sale deeds produced by the State of Haryana were not taken into consideration on the ground that these sale deeds are with respect to sale price which is below the amount offered by the LAC and cannot be taken into consideration in view of the bar under Section 25 of the 1894 Act.
4. Discussion and analysis by this Court of the arguments of the learned counsel representing the parties:
4.1. This Bench has heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paperbook along with the requisitioned record of the Courts below. 4.2 At this stage, it is considered appropriate to compile the complete information with respect to the various sale deeds produced by the parties in a tabulated form:-
For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
4 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -5-
other connected cases
SALE DEED PRODUCED BY THE LANDOWNERS Sr. Exhibit Sale Date Total Area Amount (in Rs.) Amount Per Village No. Nos. Deed (K-M) Acre (in Rs.) No. 1 PA 2152 29.11.2010 244 sq. yards 2,44,000/- 48,40,000/- Kharkhara 2 PB 2153 29.11.2010 274.5 sq. yards 2,74,500/- 48,40,000/- Kharkhara 3 PC 375 20.05.2011 605sq. Yards 6,05,000/- 48,40,000/- Kharkhara SALE DEED PRODUCED BY THE STATE 1 RW1/B 194 29.04.2010 1 kanal 2,00,000/- 16,09,000/- Kharkhara 2 RW1/C 238 04.05.2010 2K-7M 1,76,250/- 6,00,000/- Kharkhara 3 RW1/D 2794 24.01.2011 1K-16M 2,00,000/- 8,88,889/- Kharkhara 4 RW1/E 437 25.05.2011 2 kanal 2.25,000/- 9,00,000/- Kharkhara 5 RW1/F 1353 08.07.2011 2K-6M 2,59,000/- 9,00,870/- Kharkhara 4.3. On the one hand, the learned counsel representing the landowners contends that there was no occasion for the RC to apply 20% deduction on account of the development cut because the acquisition is meant for the purpose of widening of the road, therefore no development is to take place in the particular acquired land.
4.4. Upon careful study of the RC's impugned judgment, it is evident that the following errors have been committed:-
(i). The RC has relied upon the sale deed Ex.PB bearing No.2153 with respect to a 9 marla plot. On a careful perusal of the aforesaid sale deed, it is evident that it is with respect to a residential plot measuring 275.5 sq. yards. The involuntary acquisition is meant for the purpose of widening and four laning of the existing road.
There is no evidence that there was any residential area surrounding the road. In such circumstances, it was not appropriate to assess the market value of agricultural land on the basis of sale deed Ex.PB, that relates to a tiny sized residential plot. Hence, the same was not comparable with the acquired land. For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
5 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -6-
other connected cases
(ii). It has also committed an error in incorrectly interpreting Section 25 of the 1894 Act while refusing to take into consideration the sale deeds Ex.R1/B to Ex.RW1/F produced by the State on the ground that these sale deeds pertain to the sale price lower than the amount offered by the LAC. This issue is no longer res integra in view of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Lal Chand Vs. Union of India, (2009) 15 SCC 769., wherein, it was declared that there is no bar in taking into account the sale deeds produced by the parties reflecting a price lower than the amount offered by the LAC except that the landowners shall not be offered the market value lower than the amount offered by the LAC. In other words, it has been held that there is no prohibition in taking into account the sale deeds reflecting a price lower than the amount offered by the LAC.
(iii). The RC has overlooked the layout plan Ex.RW1/B. It is evident that the sale deed Ex.RW1/C bearing No.238, dated 04.05.2010, is with respect to parcel of the land located on the Major District Road-129, abutting the acquired land. The land has been sold at the rate of Rs.6,00,000/- per acre. Though, this plot is with respect to an area measuring 2 kanals and 7 marlas which is approximately 1/3rd of an acre of land. However, as compared to the other sale deeds, this is the largest plot For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
6 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -7-
other connected cases
amongst all the sale deeds that have been produced by all the parties. Moreover, the sale deed Ex.RW1/B to Ex.RW1/F clearly depict that the land located in the village Kharkhara was not beyond Rs.16,00,000/- per acre even when a small parcel of agricultural land is sold.
The three sale deeds Ex.PA (bearinig No.2153), Ex.PB (bearing No.2152) and Ex.PC (bearing No.375) produced by the landowners are with respect to the residential plots which are considerably small. Ordinarily, an acre of land consists of 4840 sq. yards. There are 8 kanals in one acre of land. In other words, each kanal consists of 605 sq. yards area. There are as many as 20 marlas in each kanal.
In general, each marla of land consists of 30.25 sq. yards of area. Thus, the plots Ex.PA (bearing No.2152) and Ex.PB (bearing No.2153), are not even with respect to one and a half (1½) kanal of land. There is no evidence of the comparable location of the parcel of land represented by the sale instance Ex.PC (bearing No.375). This again relates to only 1 kanal (605 sq. yards) of land. These types of parcels of land are not ordinarily sold or purchased for using the land for the agriculture purposes.
Thus, one of the various sale deeds produced in evidence as Ex.RW1/C (bearing No.238), is not only abutting the acquired land but its location is also comparable with the acquired land. The most relevant sale instance is For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
7 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -8-
other connected cases
Ex.RW1/C (bearing No.238), as it is abutting the acquired land.
5. Conclusion:
5.1 Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion, the RC has committed a material irregularity in relying upon the sale instance Ex.PB (bearing No.2153). Consequently, in absence of a clear and definite evidence to prove that the market value offered by the LAC was not in consonance with the actual market value of the acquired land, the RC has committed an error in assessing the market value at the rate of Rs.38,72,000/- per acre.
6. Decision:
6.1 Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the award passed by the RC is set aside while upholding the LAC's award No.36 dated 26.10.2012.
6.2 Consequently, the appeals filed by the State of Haryana are accepted/allowed, whereas, the cross-appeals as well as cross-objections filed by the landowners shall stand dismissed.
6.3 All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also disposed of.
04th November, 2022 (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
Ay JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
SR. CASE NO. PARTIES NAME
NO.
1. RFA-21-2018 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S NEELAM
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SHER SINGH
2. RFA-22-2018 AND ORS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SANJAY
3. RFA-23-2018 KUMAR For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
8 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -9-
other connected cases
4. RFA-24-2018 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S RAJ KUMAR
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S GRAM
5. RFA-25-2018 PANCHAYAT STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S OM
6. RFA-26-2018 PARKASH STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SUBE SINGH
7. RFA-41-2018 AND ANR.
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SANEH
8. RFA-42-2018 LATA AND ORS
9. RFA-44-2018 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SANT LAL STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SMT. BIMLA
10. RFA-33-2018 DEVI AND OTHERS
11. RFA-105-2018 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S VEDPAL STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S BANSI RAM
12. RFA-109-2018 AND ANR STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S BAHADUR
13. RFA-235-2018 SINGH AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S KIRODI AND
14. RFA-108-2018 OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SMT.
15. RFA-34-2018 SUMAN & ORS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S HARI SINGH
16. RFA-43-2018 AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SUBE SINGH
17. RFA-30-2018 AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SMT.
18. RFA-31-2018 SAVITA DEVI AND ANR.
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S RAJESH
19. RFA-35-2018 AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S AMAR
20. RFA-36-2018 SINGH AND ORS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S MANGE
21. RFA-38-2018 RAM AND ANR.
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S HAZARI LAL
22. RFA-40-2018 AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S GRAM
23. RFA-37-2018 PANCHAYAT STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SHISH RAM
24. RFA-39-2018 AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S ROSHAN
25. RFA-107-2018 LAL AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SMT. BIMLA
26. RFA-32-2018 DEVI AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S HANUMAN
27. RFA-147-2018 AND ORS For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
9 of 10
::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::
RFA-21-2018 (O&M) and -10-
other connected cases
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S MAHIPAL
28. RFA-104-2018 SINGH AND ORS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S RAM
29. RFA-27-2018 PARSHAD AND ORS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SUBE SINGH
30. XOBJR-127-2021 AND ANR STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SUBH RAM
31. RFA-106-2018 AND OTHERS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SADHU RAM
32. RFA-181-2018 AND OTHERS (ANIL KSHETARPAL) JUDGE For Subsequent orders see RFA-1191-2018, RFA-1192-2018, RFA-160-2019 and 12 more.
10 of 10 ::: Downloaded on - 25-12-2022 12:18:36 :::