Punjab-Haryana High Court
Date Of Decision : 11.9.2013 vs The State Of Punjab And Another on 11 September, 2013
Author: Rajesh Bindal
Bench: Rajesh Bindal
Singh Varinder
2013.11.12 10:56
R. F. A No. 1180 of 1995 (1) I attest to the accuracy and integrity
of this document
Punjab & Haryana High Court at
Chandigarh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
RFA No. 1180 of 1995 (O&M)
Date of decision : 11.9.2013
Dalip Singh and others ..... Appellants
vs
The State of Punjab and another ... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: None for the appellants.
Ms. Vandana Malhotra, Additional Advocate General, Punjab.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The landowners have approached this court through the present appeal seeking further enhancement of the compensation for the acquired land.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that State of Punjab vide notification dated 23.12.1988 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), sought to acquire land situated within the revenue estates of Village Jodhpur Romana, Tehsil and District Bathinda, for setting up Regional Research Station at Bathinda under the National Agricultural Research Project by the Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, the Collector') assessed the compensation for the acquired land @ ` 23,000/- per acre for nehri and ` 11,500/- per acre for barani/ gair mumkin kinds of land. Aggrieved against the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections. On reference, the learned court below vide award dated 12.12.1994, assessed the market value of the acquired land at ` 50,000/- per acre. It is this award which is under challenge in the present appeal.
Learned counsel for the State submitted that just and fair compensation has been awarded by the court below after considering the evidence led by the parties. However, she could not dispute the fact that earlier this court in RFA No. 1476 of 1995 Prithipal Singh vs Punjab Agricultural University, decided on 23.3.2005, has determined the market Singh Varinder 2013.11.12 10:56 R. F. A No. 1180 of 1995 (2) I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh value of the land acquired vide notification dated 30.11.1984 in the same village for the same very purpose @ ` 72,000/- per acre.
Heard learned counsel for the State and perused the paper book. It is not disputed that the land in question is the left out portion of the land acquired earlier in the vicinity for the same very purpose. It is also admitted that this court in Prithipal Singh's case (supra), had determined the market value of the land acquired vide notification dated 30.11.1984 for the same very purpose @ ` 72,000/- per acre. The present land was acquired vide notification dated 23.12.1988 i.e. after about 4 years from the earlier notification. For the time gap, the landowners deserve to be granted the increase.
Hon'ble the Supreme Court in The General Manager Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited vs Rameshbhai Jiwanbhai Patel and another JT 2008 (9) SC 480, had opined that if the increase is to be granted for the time gap of two notifications, the same should be with cumulative effect.
If the base is taken in terms of the value of the land as given in Prithipal Singh's case (supra) reasonable increase for time gap in between two acquisitions can very well be granted. Keeping in view the time gap of 4 years between the two acquisitions, in my opinion, increase @ 10% per annum with cumulative effect on ` 72,000/- would be reasonable.
Accordingly, the value of the acquired land in the present case is determined @ ` 1,05,415/- per acre. The appellants shall also be entitled to the statutory benefits available under the Act.
The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
11.9.2013 (Rajesh Bindal) vs. Judge