Delhi District Court
Mange Ram vs Uoi on 3 October, 2013
IN THE COURT OF SH. AMIT KUMAR:
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE- 01 (NORTH WEST) :
ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
LAC No. 205A/12
UID 02404C0150652012
IN RE :
MANGE RAM
S/O SH. PRABHU,
R/O VILLAGE SANOTH,
DELHI.
...... PETITIONER
V.
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR,
NORTH WEST, KANJHAWALA, NEW DELHI.
2. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
THROUGH ITS VICE CHAIRMAN,
INA, VIKAS SADAN, NEW DELHI
.........RESPONDENTS
Award No. 11/DC(NW)2004-05
Village SANOTH
Date of Award 03.07.2004
Date of Announcement
of Award 06.07.2004
Notification U/S 4 F.11(21)/02/L&B/LA/17595
dtd. 27.01.2003
Notification U/s 6 F.11(21)/02/L&B/LA/24072
dtd. 23.01.2004
Date of Receipt of Reference : 24.05.2012
Date of Arguments : 09.09.2013
Date of Decision : 03.10.2013
REFERENCE PETITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE
LAND ACQUISITION ACT, 1894
LAC No. 205A/12 Page 1 of 7
JUDGMENT
1. This is a reference petition filed u/s 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), filed by the petitioner for enhancement of compensation already awarded vide award no. 11/2004-05 dated 03.07.2004 pertaining to land as mentioned in reference u/s 18 LA Act, situated within the Revenue Estate of Village Sanoth, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the land"), which was acquired vide notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 27.01.2003. The Declaration u/s 6 of the Act was made on 23.01.2004. Award bearing no. 11/2004-05 was announced by Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as "the LAC") on 06.07.2004. The LAC determined the market price of the acquired land @ Rs. 15,70,000/- per acre for 'A' category land, Rs.14,00,000/- per acre for category 'B' land and Rs.12,30,000/- per acre for category 'C'.
2. The petitioner being aggrieved by the market value determined by the LAC challenged the said award primarily on following grounds :
i. that the LAC has not adopted the correct method of assessment of market value @ Rs.15,70,000/- per acre as he has adopted the Govt. policy dated 09.08.2001, whereby the Govt. has fixed the indicative price of the agricultural land @ Rs.15.70 lakhs per acre w.e.f 01.04.2001;
ii. that the LAC has not taken into consideration the present physical and existing developments in and around the land as the land has been acquired for the Narela Bawana Ph-II, under plan development of Delhi and surrounded by industrial area and village abadi, thus it has great market value; iii. that the LAC has failed to consider that the land has all types of facilities/civic amenities like developed metalled roads, electricity, hospitals, govt. schools, public schools, computer institutes, full fledged post office, health gym, etc. iv. that land of the petitioner is surrounded by industrial area LAC No. 205A/12 Page 2 of 7 developed by DSIDC;
v. that land of the petitioner is very fertile and fit for all purposes i.e. Commercial, residential, industrial etc.; vi. that land of petitioner is surrounded by many prestigious colonies/villages/industrial area etc.; vii. that the LAC has failed to consider the relevant transaction/sale purchase of the land, which is taking place in and around 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) compensation @ Rs.5,000/- per sq. yards besides interest @ 18% on enhanced amount of compensation and solatium @ 50% per annum addition market value.
ii) Rs. 10,000/- per bigha for loss and damages to the crops and vegetables;
iii) Rs. 1,00,000 for standing trees, boundary and structure;
iv) Rs.1,00,000/- for tubewell.
4. The respondent no. 1/Union of India and respondent no. 2 / Delhi development Authority contested the Reference Petition. Respondent no. 1 filed Written Statement.
5. The respondents denied the averments pleaded in the reference petition and asserted that sufficient compensation have been granted by the LAC; rate of land has been fixed on the basis of documents made available and produced before the LAC; area of land and other amenities thereon were considered; compensation granted by LAC is just and adequate; and petitioners is not entitled for any enhancement in the compensation awarded by the LAC. It is prayed that the reference is liable to be dismissed.
6. The petitioner admitted the statement u/s 19 of the Act. The following issues were framed :-
LAC No. 205A/12 Page 3 of 71. 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 Petitioner relied upon judgment titled as Om Prakash V. UOI, LAC no. 112/05 and also relied upon the judgment passed in LA Appeal no. 266/08 titled as Jai Singh Vs. UOI.
8. The respondent no.1 / Union of India tendered the award in question as Ex. R-1 and relied upon the evidence led by the counsel for UOI in Om Prakash V. UOI.
9. Sh. Sunil Rana, advocate proxy counsel for Sh.V.P. Rana, advocate for petitioner; Sh. R.K. Sharma, advocate for UOI; Ms. Ravi Prabha, advocate for DDA; heard. Record perused. The issue-wise findings are as under: -
10. ISSUE NO. 1 :-
The petitioner has contended that valuation of the land fixed by LAC is not reasonable & LAC has not adopted the correct method of valuation to fix market value. Petitioner has placed reliance upon evidence led in case Om Prakash, V. UOI and judgment passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case Jai Singh V. UOI, LA Appeal no. 266/08 & connected matters decided on 23.08.2011 in which Hon'ble High Court has determined the market values of the land pertained to village Sanoth acquired through notification dated 27.01.2003 and same award, as Rs.19,43,500/- per acre for category 'A' land, Rs.18,94,912.50 per LAC No. 205A/12 Page 4 of 7 acre for category 'B' and Rs.18,47,539.68 per acre for category 'C' land. The relevant observations of the High Court of Delhi in Jai Singh Vs. UOI case are as under:
"95. Pertaining to the appeals and cross objections by the land owners and Union of India as per 'GRID-P' pertaining to the notification dated 27.1.2003 relating to village Sanoth, I note that the learned Land Acquisition Collector has placed the lands in 3 categories and I find that the learned Reference Court has without any discussion held the lands as of uniform category while awarding compensation.
96. On the mean average basis which I have been following by increasing the price as of 1.4.2001 with reference to the notification issued by the Government as also by increasing the same with reference to the sale deed dated 20.5.2002 and taking the mean average, for Category 'A' lands the price comes to Rs.19,43,500/- per acre and for Category 'B' land the price comes to Rs.18,94,912.50 per acre and for Category 'C' lands the price comes to Rs. 18,47,539.68 per acre. I find that the learned Reference Court has uniformly determined fair market value at Rs. 19,13,765/- and thus such appeals or cross objections which have been filed by land owners the same have to be dismissed in so far they pertain to Category 'B' and Category 'C' lands and similar would be the fate of appeals and cross objections filed by Union of India pertaining to Category 'A' lands. The said appeals and cross objections as per 'GRID- P' are dismissed. Appeals and cross objections filed by land owners pertaining to Category 'A' lands are allowed by decreeing compensation payable in sum of Rs.19,43,500/- per acre and needless to state on the enhanced compensation statutory benefits as per the Land Acquisition Act 1894 as interpreted in the judgment reported as Sunder Vs. UOI 2001 (93) DLT 569 shall be paid save and except in such appeals and cross objections where there is a delay, interest would not be paid for the period of delay. Proportionate costs as well. The appeals and cross objections filed by Union of India pertaining to Category 'B' LAC No. 205A/12 Page 5 of 7 and Category 'C' lands are allowed by modifying the relatable decree in the Reference Order by reducing the compensation for Category 'B' land to Rs.18,94,912.50 per acre and for Category 'C' land to Rs.18,47,539.68 per acre."
Therefore, there is no ground to go differently then what the High Court of Delhi has held in Jai Singh case. The petitioner would be entitled to market value @ Rs.19,43,500/- per acre as determined in Jai Singh case for category 'A' land.
11. The petitioner have also claimed compensation for damages to crops and vegetables, trees etc. The petitioner has not led any evidence to prove that they are entitle to any compensation for the same. The petitioner in the absence of any cogent evidence is not entitled to any compensation for the same.
12. The petitioner shall also be entitled to statutory benefits i.e. 12% additional amount u/s 23 (1-A), 30% solatium u/s 23 (2) and interest @ 9% for the first year & 15% for subsequent years till the making of payment of enhanced compensation by the LAC as per section 28 of LA Act.
13. In view of above issue no. 1 is decided as below:
i) Petitioner shall be entitled to enhance compensation @ Rs.
19,43,500/- per acre for his land mentioned in category 'A' as per statement u/s 19 LA Act.
ii) The petitioner in the absence of any cogent evidence is not entitled to any compensation for crops & vegetables, trees etc.
14. Issue no. 2 - RELIEF
i) Market value of the land is fixed @ Rs. 19,43,500/- per acre LAC No. 205A/12 Page 6 of 7 for the land mentioned in category 'A' as per statement u/s 19 LA Act.
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 LA Act @ 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation.
iv) Interest under Section 28 of LA 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 the payment.
15. The reference is disposed of accordingly. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court today on 03.10.2013 (AMIT KUMAR) ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-01(NW) ROHINI COURTS, DELHI LAC No. 205A/12 Page 7 of 7