Delhi District Court
Rani Sharma vs Uoi 2001 (93) Dlt 569 Shall Be on 10 May, 2012
IN THE COURT OF Dr. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN:
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE01 (NORTHWEST):
ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
LAC No. 348A/11
UID No. 02404C0304982011
IN RE :
RANI SHARMA
W/O P.K. SHARMA
R/O F1/3, MODEL TOWN,
NEW DELHI110 009.
...... PETITIONER
V.
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR,
NORTH WEST, DELHI.
2. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
VIKAS SADAN, DELHI
........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
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 : 24.10.2011
Date of Arguments : 09.05.2012
Date of Decision: 10.05.2012
LAC No. 348A/11 Page 1 of 8
REFERENCE PETITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE
LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
JUDGMENT
1. This is a Reference Petition u/s 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") filed by the petitioner Rani Sharma for enhancement of compensation awarded vide award no.
33/200304 dtd. 31.03.2004 pertaining to the land falling in khasra no. 27//1(416), 10(416), 11(400) measuring 13 bigha 12 biswa having 1/3rd share, situated in the revenue estate of village Holambi Kalan (hereinafter referred to as "the land"), acquired vide notification under Section 4 of the Act issued on 22.08.2001;
declaration u/s 6 of the Act was made on 26.07.2002; Award bearing no. 33/200304 was announced by Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as "the LAC") on 31.03.2004. The LAC determined the market price of the acquired land @ Rs.15,70,000/ per acre.
2. The petitioner has challenged the market value of the land determined by the LAC primarily on following grounds : i. that the LAC had failed to consider that there was approved / sanctioned farm house on the land for which petitioner along with co owners have spent lacs of rupees for its construction and equipments;
ii. that the LAC has not adopted the correct method of assessment of market value of the acquired land and assessed the compensation merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures;
iii. that the LAC has not considered the fact that land LAC No. 348A/11 Page 2 of 8 surrounded by industrial area of Bawana, GT Road, Narela, Rohini and several godwons and factories; iv. that the land is levelled and fit for construction of commercial/industrial/residential farm or building purposes without further improvement.
v. that the LAC has failed to appreciate that the land is very fertile, gives at least 23 crops in a year, and petitioner has installed tube well, electric connection, rooms etc. vi. that the LAC has failed to appreciate that government has provided all civic amenities like roads, electricity, telephone, bus services, hospitals, school etc. near and around the land;
vii.that the LAC has committed error while ignoring the sale consideration relevant to determine the market value of the land;
viii.That the LAC wrongly influenced by the policy announced by the Government which is not true market value of the land.
3. The petitioner prayed the compensation as under: i. Rs. 10,000/ per sq. yard for the acquired land; ii. Rs. 1000/ per sq. ft. for structure;
iii. Rs. 6 lacs for electrification charges; iv. Rs. 4.50 lacs for water supply and sanitary installation; v. Rs. 75,000/ for MC gate;
vi. Rs. 8.50 lacs for erection of compound wall; vii.Rs. 10 lacs for roads and pavings;
viii.Rs. 10 lacs for plants /trees;
ix. Rs. 30 lacs for swimming pool;
x. Rs. 2.50 lacs for extra items.
4. The respondent no. 1 / Union of India and respondent no. 2 / Delhi Development Authority contested the reference petition by filing written statements.
LAC No. 348A/11 Page 3 of 85. The respondents denied the averments pleaded in the reference petition and asserted that the compensation assessed by the LAC is sufficient and reasonable; there was no structure, trees, well on the land in question at the time of notification u/s 4 of the Act; that the reference is liable to be dismissed.
6. The petitioner admitted the statement u/s 19 of LA Act. The following issues were framed vide order dated 12.03.2012 :
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to enhancement in compensation. If so, to what amount?
2. Relief.
7. The petitioner has not examined any witness in support of the claim for enhancement of compensation. The petitioner adopted the evidence led by petitioner of the case titled as Ashok Kumar V. UOI, LAC no. 199A/09.
8. The respondent no. 1 / Union of India tendered the award as Ex.
R1 and adopted the evidence led on behalf of UOI in case Ashok Kumar V. UOI
9. Sh. M.C. Verma Advocate for petitioner and Ms. Praveen Sharma, Advocate for respondent no. 1 / Union of India heard. Record perused. The issuewise findings are as under: ISSUE NO. 1
10. Petitioner has contended that valuation of land determined by LAC is not reasonable as LAC has not adopted the correct method of LAC No. 348A/11 Page 4 of 8 valuation. Counsel for petitioner relied up on the judgement decided by Ashok Kumar V. UOI, LAC no. 199A/09. Respondent no. 1 / Union of India also adopted the evidence led by the counsel for UOI in Ashok Kumar. The counsel for the petitioner argued that decision in Ashok Kumar pertained to the same Village, Notifications, Award by which the land is acquired. The counsel for petitioner prayed that same market value of the land be determined.
11. The High Court of Delhi in LA Appeal no. 266/08 titled as Jai Singh V. UOI & anrs. dated 24.08.2011, has determined the market value of the land pertaining to village Holambi Kalan acquired through notification u/s 4 dated 22.08.2001 as Rs.16,74,500/ per acre for category 'A' land and Rs.16,43,811/ per acre for category 'B' land. The relevant paras of Jai Singh case as under :
74. With reference to the notification dated 9.8.2001 wherein with effect from 1.4.2001 minimum price notified per acre is Rs.15.70 lakhs per acre and requiring said price to be suitably updated to reach the date of the notification i.e. 22.8.2001 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 22.8.2001;
LAC No. 348A/11 Page 5 of 8the mean average price for Category 'A' lands in village Holambi Kalan comes to `16,74,500/ per acre and decreasing the same by 2.5%, it comes to Rs.16,32,637.50 per acre for Category 'B' lands. Noting that the learned Reference Court has, without any reasons, done away with Category ‗B' lands and uniform price awarded is `16,43,811/ per acre, the price differential worked out by me comes to a meager `9,000/ per acre and thus qua Category 'B' lands I maintain the amount awarded by the learned Reference Court.
75. All Land Acquisition Appeals filed by the Union of India and cross objections wherever filed by Union of India in the appeals filed by land owners in respect whereof grid has been prepared and labeled as 'GRIDF' & 'GRIDG' hereinabove are dismissed.
76. All Land Acquisition Appeals filed by 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 Holambi Kalan pertaining to the notification dated 22.8.2001 in sum of Rs.16,74,500/ per acre and for Category 'B' lands the compensation awarded at Rs.16,43,811/ per acre is maintained and thus such appeals or cross references which pertain to Category 'B' lands are dismissed.
77. Pertaining to such appeal where the compensation stands enhanced 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 or cross objection, for which period of delay no interest on the enhanced compensation shall be paid. These appellants or cross objectors would be entitled to proportionate cost."
12. There is no ground / reason to differ from the findings of Jai Singh LAC No. 348A/11 Page 6 of 8 judgment. The market value of land @ Rs.16,74,500/ per acre is determined accordingly as such giving an enhancement of Rs.
1,04,500/ per acre.
13. The petitioner has also claimed Rs. 1000/ per sq. ft. for structure, Rs. 6 lacs for electrification charges, Rs. 4.50 lacs for water supply and sanitary installation, Rs. 75,000/ for MC gate, Rs. 8.50 lacs for erection of compound wall, Rs. 10 lacs for roads and pavings, Rs.
10 lacs for plants /trees and Rs. 30 lacs for swimming pool. The petitioner has not led any evidence to prove that he is entitle for compensation for structure, electrification, water supply, sanitary installation, wall, roads, plants/trees, swimming pool etc. The petitioner in the absence of any cogent evidence is not entitled to any compensation for structure, electrification, water supply, sanitary installation, wall, roads, plants/trees, swimming pool etc.
14. The findings of issues no. 1 are as under: i. Market value of land is fixed @ Rs.16,74,500/ per acre , as such giving enhancement of Rs.1,04,500/ per acre; ii. The petitioner is not awarded compensation for structure, electrification, water supply, sanitary installation, wall, roads, plants/trees, swimming pool etc.
15. The petitioner shall also be entitled to statutory benefits i.e. 12% Additional Amount as per section 23(1A), 30% solatium u/s 23 (2), and interest @ 9% per annum for the first year and 15% for subsequent years till the making of payment of enhanced compensation by the LAC as per of Section 28 of the Act.
LAC No. 348A/11 Page 7 of 816. Issue No. 2 - RELIEF i. Market value of the petitioner land is fixed @ Rs.16,74,500/ per acre giving enhancement of Rs. 1,04,500/ per acre;
ii. Additional amount u/s 23 (1A) of the Act @ 12% p.a. from the date of notification u/s 4 of the Act till the date of award or dispossession, whichever is earlier ;
iii. Solatium u/s 23(2) of the Act @ 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation;
iv. Interest under Section 28 of the 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 payment.
17. The reference is disposed of accordingly. The decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to record room.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON TODAY i.e. 10.05.2012 (Dr. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN) ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE01 ROHINI COURTS, DELHI LAC No. 348A/11 Page 8 of 8