Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Of H.P. & Others vs Sewa Ram And Another on 13 March, 2015
Author: Dharam Chand Chaudhary
Bench: Dharam Chand Chaudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
RFA No.297 of 2007.
Decided on: 13th March, 2015.
.
State of H.P. & others .. Appellants.
Versus Sewa Ram and another .. Respondents.
Coram Whether approved for reporting?1 No. r to The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge.
For the appellants : Mr. Virender Verma, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Pushpinder Singh Jaswal, Deputy Advocate General.
For the respondents: Mr. G.D. Verma, Senior Advocate, with Mr. B.C. Verma, Advocate.
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (oral).
The State aggrieved by the award dated 18th August, 2007, passed in Land Reference No.2-N/4 of 2005, whereby learned Additional District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, has re-determined the compensation at the rate of `2 lacs with respect to the land belonging to the respondents (hereinafter to be referred as 'the petitioners'), bearing Khasra Nos.12/1, 111/1, 124/2, 280/1, 270/1, 259/1 and 269/1, measuring 3-7 bighas, situate in Mauza Shargoan, Tehsil Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, acquired for the public purpose, namely construction of Yashwant Nagar-Dhamla (Neripul) 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:46:23 :::HCHP -2-road alongwith additional amount at the rate of 12% per annum on the market value so re-determined from the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Land .
Acquisition Act (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'), to the date of the award and also the amount equivalent to 30% of the market value of the land so re-determined under Section 23(2) of the Act, has filed the present appeal with a prayer to set aside the same. The petitioners were also held entitled to the interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the sum total firstly for a period of one year from 9th September, 1995, the date of notification and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the compensation so re-determined is deposited.
2. The notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 29th July, 1995, which was published in HP Rajpatra on 9th September, 1995. The same was also published in the issue of "Jansatta" a Hindi daily dated 11th September, 1995 and in that of "Vir Pratap", again a Hindi daily in its issue dated 10th September, 1995. The notifications under Sections 6 and 7 of the Act were also issued subsequently on 31st September, 1996, which were published in two newspapers on 15th October, 1996 and 23rd October, 1996, respectively. The Land Acquisition Collector, appellant No.2, after following further procedure prescribed under the Act has made Award ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:46:23 :::HCHP -3- No.40 of 2000, on 31st July, 2000 and awarded the compensation with respect to different category of acquired land, as follows:
.
Sr.No. Class of land Rates per bigha.
1. Kuhal Shhamih ` 96,348.00
2. Ober Khadi ` 71,090.70
3. Ober Garir Khadi ` 59,454.00
4. Banjar Jadeed ` 19,575.40
5. Banjar Kadim ` 9,272.00
6. Ghasni ` 6,181.80
7. Nakabil and Gair ` 1,030.30 Mumkin
3. Learned Additional District Judge has, however, re-determined and reassessed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of ` 2 lacs per bigha, as pointed out at the outset and enhanced the compensation payable to the petitioners accordingly.
4. The legality and validity of the award under challenge has been assailed on the grounds, inter alia, that learned Additional District Judge has neither taken into consideration the evidence available on record nor the settled legal principles and based the impugned award on surmises and conjectures. The compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector is stated to be just and reasonable, whereas the compensation at ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:46:23 :::HCHP -4- enhanced rate determined by learned Additional District Judge is stated to be excessive and on higher side.
5. It is seen that the oral as well as documentary .
evidence qua the market value of the land produced by the petitioners being not relevant in the given facts and circumstances of this case has not been relied upon by learned Additional District Judge. Such evidence in the shape of sale instances has been discarded on the ground that such instances not pertain to Mauza Shargoan, but are that of village Neri Jagala. The only sale instance tendered in evidence on behalf of the appellants-State has also been discarded that thereby a small piece of land has been sold. Learned Additional District Judge, however, has placed reliance on a previous award Ext.P-7 and re-determined the market value of the acquired land at the rate of `2 lacs on the basis thereof.
6. The appellants had also preferred RFA No.302 of 2007 against the present petitioners, feeling aggrieved by the re-determination of the market value of their acquired land at the rate of `2 lacs per bigha. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has dismissed the said appeal alongwith connected matters vide judgment dated 24th September, 2008 and upheld the award passed by the District Judge in that case.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:46:23 :::HCHP -5-7. The judgment in RFA No.302 of 2007 has been relied upon by this Bench also while deciding RFA No.294 of 2007, titled Ramesh Kumar and others v. State of H.P. .
and others and its connected matters vide judgment dated 17th September, 2014. The acquired land of the petitioners in RFA No.302 of 2007 was situated in Mauza Shargoan. In the present case also, the acquired land is situated in the same Mauza. Therefore, the point in issue is covered against the appellants-State vide judgments dated 24th September, 2008 in RFA No.302 of 2007 and its connected matters and RFA No.294 of 2007 dated 17th September, 2014 and its connected matters. Therefore, this appeal is also dismissed.
March 13, 2015 (Dharam Chand Chaudhary),
(rc) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 17:46:23 :::HCHP