Punjab-Haryana High Court
Smt. Murti Devi vs State Of Haryana And Others on 24 January, 2012
Author: Rajesh Bindal
Bench: Rajesh Bindal
R.F.A. No. 950 of 1998 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
R.F.A. No. 950 of 1998 (O&M)
Date of decision: January 24, 2012
Smt. Murti Devi
.. Appellant
Vs.
State of Haryana and others
.. Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL
Present: Mr. Jaswant Jain, Mr. M. L. Saini and
Mr. Sanjay Mittal, Advocates for the land owners.
Mr. Sourabh Goel and Mr. Ankit Goel, Advocates
for HAFED.
...
Rajesh Bindal J.
1. This order will dispose of RFA Nos. 950, 1475, 1899 to 1903, 2319, 3160 and 3161 of 1998, as common questions of law and facts are involved.
2. The land owners are in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land, whereas HAFED is in appeal challenging the award of the court below praying for setting aside thereof and upholding the award of the Collector, as the land in question was acquired for construction of Oil Mill by HAFED.
3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that State of Haryana vide notification dated 25.11.1994, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act'), sought to acquire 13 acres, 7 kanals and 5 marlas of land in town Narnaul, District Mahendergarh for construction of Oil Mill and Complex of Haryana State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Limited at Narnaul. The same was followed by notification dated 28.2.1995, issued under Section 6 of the R.F.A. No. 950 of 1998 [2] Act. Finally, the award was announced by Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') on 16.8.1995 only for land, measuring 7 acres and one kanal, assessing the compensation @ ` 1,32,989/- per acre for Chahi land; ` 1,94,894/- per acre for Barani land and ` 3,70,700/- per acre for Gair Mumkin kind of land. On reference, the learned court below determined the market value @ ` 12,00,000/- per acre for the land situated on Narnaul-Nizampur road upto a depth of 100 yards and ` 4,00,000/- per acre for the remaining land.
4. Learned counsel for the land owners submitted that the land in question is located on Narnaul-Nizampur road within the municipal limits of Narnaul. It is located at a place where there were lot of commercial establishments in the vicinity. Residential colonies were also located close by. A unit of Haryana Minerals Limited was also located just close to the acquired land. On the road, number of shops, offices and industrial establishments had been constructed. The area was developing at a very fast pace as the road in question was further connected to Jaipur Highway. The land pertaining to two sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7), registered on 23.7.1992, more than two years prior to the acquisition of land, is forming part of the acquired land. This is the most appropriate evidence to be considered. Vide aforesaid two sale deeds, plots measuring about 200 square yards were sold @ ` 400/- per square yard. The increase for the time gap till the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act is to be granted at least @ 15% per annum and the entire land deserves to be assessed at the same rate, considering the fact that the land was fit for urbanisation and no cut was required to be applied. In the urban area, the land is always sold in the form of small plots. Big chunk of land is rarely available. All the land owners also owned small chunks of land and they would have sold the same in small pieces. The value of the acquired land was to be considered in the aforesaid circumstances.
5. He further submitted that a Committee was constituted to assess the value of the acquired land, wherein it was opined that value of Gair Mumkin kind of land was not less than ` 10,00,000/- per acre one year prior to the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act.
R.F.A. No. 950 of 1998 [3]6. On the other hand, learned counsel for HAFED submitted that in case the sale deeds produced by the land owners are to be relied upon, it should be the average of all the sale deeds produced by them and thereafter considering the fact that those pertained to small plots, a reasonable cut, which should be to the extent of 50%, be applied. Reliance cannot be placed only on two sale deeds claiming that the land pertaining to those sale deeds was forming part of the acquired land, when the land owners had themselves produced other sale deeds showing sale consideration at a lesser rate even though registered later in time. He further submitted that the land in question was not acquired for any profiteering. It was for setting up of an oil mill in co-operative sector. No plots were carved out for sale. The submission is that in the evidence led before the court below, HAFED had brought on record that the matter pertaining to acquisition of land was in the knowledge of the land owners in the area as a survey was conducted earlier. Considering the aforesaid fact, sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) were got registered by the land owners showing higher rates. In fact, these sale deeds deserve to be ignored.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record.
8. There is a site plan on record at page 567, which has been prepared by the Patwari and duly signed by the Kanungo of the area. It shows the location of the land pertaining to sale-deeds (Ex. P1, Ex. P4 and Ex. P10 to Ex. P12) produced by the land owners and the land pertaining to sale deeds (Ex. R1 to Ex. R3, Ex. R20, Ex. R21 and Ex. R25) produced by the State. The acquired land is abutting a road, which is quite close to the abadi of Narnaul. The land pertaining to sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) is forming part of the acquired land, whereas that of sale deed (Ex. P1) is located behind that. The land pertaining to sale deed (Ex. P11) is also located quite close. The land pertaining to sale deed (Ex. P10) is located beyond the acquired land, if we move away from city. Towards the city, there was already existing factory of Haryana Minerals Ltd. The land pertaining to sale deeds (Ex. R1, Ex. R2 and Ex. R3) produced by the State are also located close to the acquired land, as is evident from the site plan. The details of the sale deeds produced by the land owners, the land R.F.A. No. 950 of 1998 [4] pertaining to which is located either within the acquired land or close by, are extracted below:
"Sr. Exhibit Sale deed No. Area Sale Rate per Rate per No. and date sold consideration sq. yard acre in ` in ` in ` Bigha- Biswa- Biswansi ..................................................................................................................................
1. Ex. P1 600/19.4.1993 0- 1- 0 75,000/- 500/- 24,20,000/-
2. Ex. P6 846/23.7.1992 0- 1- 7 80,000/ 400/- 19,36,000/-
3. Ex. P7 847/23.7.1992 0- 1- 10 90,000/- 400/- 19,36,000/-
4. Ex. P10 130/6.5.1994 0- 1- 12 1,20,000/- 500/- 24,20,000/-
5. Ex. P11 1169/5.10.1988 0- 3- 0 70,000/- 154/- 7,45,360/-
9. The details of the sale deeds produced by the State, the land pertaining to which is also located close by, are extracted below:
"Sr. Exhibit Sale deed No. Area Sale Rate per Rate per No. and date sold consideration sq. yard acre in ` in ` in ` Bigha- Biswa ..................................................................................................................................
1. Ex. R1 100/23.4.1993 0 -6 35,000/- 38.88 1,88,222/-
2. Ex. R2 814/31.10.1992 0 -3 30,000/- 66.66 3,22,666/-
3. Ex. R3 1665/31.10.1992 0 -3 22,000/- 48.88 2,36,622/-"
10. The primary contention raised by learned counsel for the land owners was that the sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) having been registered two years prior to the date of acquisition and the land pertaining thereto forming part of the acquired land is the best piece of evidence and no other sale deed should be relied upon. Further submission was that increase at least @ 15% per annum be granted thereon and no cut should be applied as the area is forming part of municipal limits, Narnaul, where the land was being sold in small plots. Further reference was also made to report of Commissioner, Gurgaon Division (Ex. R10), wherein it has been specifically noticed that average value of the land shown in the sale deeds registered during last one year prior to the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act was ` 10,20,290/- per acre and one year prior thereto, the same was ` 3,37,000/- per acre. The Collector instead of awarding compensation in terms of the value shown in the sale deeds immediately prior to the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act had, in fact, taken the value one year prior thereto and added 10% thereon R.F.A. No. 950 of 1998 [5] and awarded compensation ` 3,70,700/- per acre. Even though the Commissioner has noticed in his report that the average sale consideration paid during last one year was ` 211/- per square yard, however, he is not categoric as to what was the rate on the date of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and as to which of the sale deeds had been considered for arriving at that figure.
11. The contention raised by learned counsel for HAFED was that the value shown in the sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) should not be considered for the purpose of assessment of compensation in the present case for the reason that those were got registered at inflated prices by the land owners knowing fully well that the land is going to be acquired. The sale deeds produced by the State (Ex. R1 to Ex. R3) located close to the acquired land show the sale consideration @ ` 1,88,222/- to ` 2,36,622/- per acre.
12. As to whether the value shown in the sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) should be considered for the purpose of assessment of fair value of the acquired land or the same is required to be ignored for the reason that these were showing inflated value is required to be considered. Sale deed (Ex. P11) was registered on 5.10.1988. In the site plan, referred to above, the land pertaining thereto is not located on the road. It is a small plot of 3 Biswas. The average sale consideration paid therein was ` 154/- per square yard. The location thereof on the site plan shows that there must be some rasta connecting this plot, otherwise no one will buy a small plot only for agricultural purposes. Then comes two sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7), which are forming part of the acquired land. The average sale consideration paid therein is ` 400/- per square yard. These were registered on 23.7.1992. Subsequent thereto, sale deed (Ex. P1) was registered pertaining to the land which is located behind the acquired land on 19.4.1993 and the average sale consideration paid therein is ` 500/- per square yard. Even as per the figure mentioned in the report of Commissioner, Gurgaon Division (Ex. R10), the average sale consideration paid for the transaction of land located on the road during last one year was ` 211/- per square yard. Six months after the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, a plot of land was sold on 6.5.1994 R.F.A. No. 950 of 1998 [6] (sale deed Ex. P10), which is located beyond the acquired land the average sale consideration paid therein is ` 500/- per square yard. The trend of prices in the sale deeds, which have been referred to above, does not apparently show that the transaction pertaining to land of sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) have been entered into at inflated prices, hence, the same can be relied upon for the purpose of assessment of compensation for the acquired land.
13. After crossing the hurdle of finding as to which of the sale deeds is relevant for the purpose of assessment of compensation, now the issue arises as to what should be the reasonable amount of compensation. The average sale consideration paid in sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) is ` 400/- per square yard. The same were registered two years and four months prior to the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. Considering the trend of prices and the fact that the land is located within municipal limits and also that even the State had produced the sale deeds pertaining to the plots located close to the acquired land, which were of small size, in my opinion, increase of 25% for the time gap can very well be added therein. After granting increase of ` 100/- on ` 400/- per square yard, the average sale consideration shown in sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) shall come out to ` 500/- per square yard. The sale deeds are pertaining to plots of 200 square yards. The acquired land is 7 acres and one kanal. Considering the facts, in my opinion, application of a cut of 40% would be reasonable. Reducing that amount, the value of the acquired land located on the road can very well be assessed @ ` 300/- per square yard as against ` 12,00,000/- per acre awarded by the court below upto the depth of 100 yards on Narnaul-Nizampur road. As far as value of the land located behind that, it cannot be assessed at the same rate as there is always difference between the two. The learned court below has merely granted 1/3rd of the value of land located on the main road, which, in my opinion, is not appropriate method., The acquired land beyond 100 yards from the road deserves to be assessed @ ` 7,00,000/- per acre.
14. Ordered accordingly.
15. As far as genuineness of sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) are concerned, the same is not disputed by the State. It is also evident on R.F.A. No. 950 of 1998 [7] record that the land owners therein had paid more value as compared to the value determined by this court for acquisition of the land. They cannot be put to loss as payment of less value than what they had spent on the purchase of the property would amount to depriving them from their property without adequate compensation. Accordingly, I deem it appropriate to grant them compensation to the tune of amount spent by them granting increase @ 10% per annum thereon. Accordingly, the compensation payable to the land owners of land forming part of sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) shall be ` 500/- per square yard. They shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits available to them under the Act. Similar view was expressed by this court in Gurmukh Singh v. Punjab State, 1987 Recent Revenue Reports 143; R.F.A. No. 122 of 2000 -Smt. Neelam v. State of Haryana and others, decided on 22.9.2008 and R.F.A. No. 1841 of 2000--The State of Haryana v. Ujjagar Singh (deceased) through LRs, decided on 16.12.2008.
16. For the reasons mentioned above, the land owners shall be entitled to compensation @ ` 300/- per square yard for the acquired land upto the depth of 100 yards and ` 7,00,000/- per acre for the remaining land. The land owners, who purchased the land vide sale deeds (Ex. P6 and Ex. P7) shall be entitled to compensation @ ` 500/- per square yard. The land owners shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits available to them under the Act.
17. The appeals are disposed of in the above terms.
( Rajesh Bindal ) Judge January 24, 2012 mk