Delhi District Court
Om Prakash & Ors. vs . Uoi & Ors. on 17 March, 2015
Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
In the Court of Additional District Judge02, South District, Room No. 602,
Sixth Floor, Saket Courts Complex, New Delhi
In the matter of :
LAC No. 253/11
[Unique ID No. 02403C0963902007]
1. Sh. Om Prakash, S/o Late Hazari (deceased)
Through LR's :
(i) Smt.Ram Rati Wd/o Om Prakash
(ii) Sh. Raj Kumar
(iii) Sh. Shiv Kumar
(iv) Sh. Narinder Kumar
(v) Sh. Hari Chander
(vi) Sh. Sunil Kumar
(vii) Sh. Anil Kumar
(viii) Sh. Kapil Kumar
(ix) Sh. Kuldeep
All sons of Late Shri Om Prakash
R/o Village - Khizarabad, New Delhi.
(x) Smt. Bimla w/o Sh. Sudesh Chaprana
(xi) Smt. Shimla w/o Sh.Billu
Both d/o late Sh.Om Prakash
2. Sh. Ram Pal, S/o late Hazari (deceased)
Through LR's :
(i) Smt. Harwati Wd/o Rampal
(ii) Sh.Balkishan s/o Sh.Rampal s/o late Hazari (deceased)
Through LR's :
(a) Smt. Babita Wd/o Bal Kishan
(b) Ms.Mahima d/o (minor) Sh. Bal Kishan
(c) Ms. Manshi d/o (minor) Sh.Bal Kishan
(d) Master Daksh s/o (minor) Sh.Bal Kishan
2's minor (b) (c) and (d) through their mother/guardian
Mrs. Babita (a) above
all r/o Village - Khizarabad, New Delhi
(iii) Sh. Ram Singh s/o Sh. Rampal
(iv) Sh. Shyam Singh s/o Sh. Rampal
(v) Ms.Aarti d/o Sh.Rampal
All r/o Village - Khizarabad, New Delhi.
LAC No. 253/2011 Page 1 of 16
Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
3. Sh.Shiv Raj @ Sheo Raj, S/o Hazari (deceased)
Through LR's :
(i) Smt. Premwati Wd/o Sheo Raj
(ii) Inderjeet Singh s/o Sheo Raj
(iii) Sh. Sunder Singh s/o Sh. Sheo Raj
All r/o Village - Khizarabad, New Delhi
(v) Smt. Indresh d/o Sh.Sheo Raj
(vi) Smt. Kamlesh d/o Sh.Sheo Raj
4. Sh.Vijay Pal, S/o Late Hazari
5. Sh. Ramu, S/o Late Hazari
both r/o Village - Khizarabad, New Delhi
...Petitioners
Versus
1. Union of India
Through L.A.C.
D.C.Office, Saidulajjab, M.B.Road, Saket, New Delhi
2. The Land Acquisition Colelctor (S.E)
D.C.Office (S.E.) at Old Building of Gargi College,
Behind Lady Shri Ram College, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi
3. Delhi Development Authority
Through its Secretary/Vice Chairman
I.N.A. Vikas Sadan, New Delhi.
... Respondents
Reference Received from LAC on : 11.1.2007
Date of Institution : 22.2.2011 (LAC No.253/11)
Decision reserved on : 24.02.2015
Date of Decision : 17.03.2015
LAC No. 253/2011 Page 2 of 16
Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
AWARD
(by the Court u/s 26 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on reference petition u/s 18 of the Act, 1894) 1.1. (Introduction) In order to decide the petitioner reference petition u/s 18 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (in brief the Act, 1894) read with statement u/s 19 of the Act referred by the Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi, the relevant dates, features and facts are given below:
(i) Date of notification U/s 4 of the Act 05.07.1973
(ii) Date of notification U/s 6 of the Act 31.1.1976
(iii) for Project Planned Development of Delhi
(iv) Location/Name of Village Khizrabad (va)Award Number U/s 11 of Act by LAC 75/198687 & date of award 19.9.1986 (vb) Area under acquisition 21 bigha 10 biswa (via) Date of reference petition to LAC 19.8.1987 (vib) Petition referred to Court on 11.01.2007 1.2 Pursuant to preliminary notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 followed by declaration vide notification under section 6 of the Act, 1894, the Collector acquired petitioners' land measuring 21 bigha 10 biswa, detailed in statement U/s 19 of the Act with share of each petitioner and on 18.1.1989 they were paid the compensation from the office but under protest. The Land Acquisition LAC No. 253/2011 Page 3 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
Collector had after considering the location of land, determined compensation @ Rs.8000/ per bigha for BlockA and Rs.6,500/ per bigha for BlockB. Then, the petitioners feeling aggrieved preferred a reference petition under section 18 of the Act, 1894 against respondents no. 1 and 2 before Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi. The petition along with statement under section 19 of the Act, 1984 has been sent to the Court by the Land Acquisition Collector to decide the reference by giving details of acquired area, date of possession and rates of compensation and shares of each petitioner. The DDA was impleaded as respondent no.3 by order dated 1.4.2014 of the Court.
Petitioners' Case 2.1 The Petitioners feeling aggrieved by the said Award, filed a joint reference petition under section 18 of the Act, 1894 before Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi. The petitioners have sought enhanced compensation of the land acquired.
2.2 The petitioners assail the impugned Award of LAC that the market value of the land has not been correctly assessed and it is at a LAC No. 253/2011 Page 4 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
very low rate of Rs.6,500/ per bigha without appreciating that petitioners' land and its potentiality, the award is not acceptable and binding to the petitioners. Even notices were not given to them before announce of award. Paragraph of grounds of petition narrates facts about of nature of land, its location, surroundings and prices of other adjacent lands as well as judicial pronouncements while determining the rates in the area. The petitioner's land is surrounded by well developed such as Kalindi, Maharani Bagh, Friends Colony and Jakir Nagar, which are fresh and developed colonies, where market rate of land is not less than Rs.3000/ per sq.yards. As per revenue record, the land is surrounded by land of Village Kilokari, Okhla and Jogabai, for which the court of the then Additional District Judge assessed the market rate of Rs.11/ to Rs.30/ per sq yards in the notifications of year 1959 and of 1964. The petitioners' land almost touches abadideh of Village Khizrabad, therefore, it has more rate than other lands. However, ld LAC had failed to take into consideration all these vital aspects, that is why the present. The petitioners claim rate of Rs.1,000/ per square yard.
2.3 However, the petitioner no. 2, 5 and 1 had expired during pending of petition, their LRs were impleaded by orders dated 30.8.2007 and LAC No. 253/2011 Page 5 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
19.8.2014, their names have been reflected in the array of parties. Respondents' Case
3. The respondent no. 3 had not filed the written statement. But respondent no. 1 and 2 filed its written statement and opposed the reference petition and allegations or claimed made in the petition, by further explaining that the findings given by Collector in his Award is based on market value of the land, the compensation was correct and it was rightly assessed in accordance with the conditions prevailing at relevant time and petitioners failed to bring on record any evidence in support of petition to claim higher compensation. The rates as claimed by the petitioners are excessive and exorbitant, they are not entitled for rate of Rs.1000/ per bigha. The land is governed by the provisions of Delhi Land Reforms Act, there is no scope of enhancement of compensation. The reference petition is also barred by law.
Issues 4.1 On 31.8.2007 the following issues were framed for determination : (1) What is the right, share and interest of petitioners in the acquired land?
LAC No. 253/2011 Page 6 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
(2) What was the market value of land acquired on the date of issuance of notification U/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894? (3) To what enhanced in compensation, if any, are petitioners entitled?
(4) Relief. 4.2 On 11.11.2014, the petitioners came with an application U/O
XIV rule 5 CPC ( when matter was subjudice for final arguments) for striking of issue no.1 above, being irrelevant. Evidence 5.1 In order to establish the issues, the petitioners were given opportunity to lead evidence. Their Counsel Shri N S Chechi, Advocate tendered judgment dated 23.8.2007 of case LAC no.20/2003 Ramphool Vs Union of India (Ex P1) of same area and notification, then the petitioners' evidence was closed.
5.2 Then, respondents were given opportunity to lead evidence and Shri S K Puri, the then counsel for Union of India and LAC, tendered copy of Award no.75/8687 (as Ex R1) in its evidence, then evidence was closed. There is no evidence by respondent no.3. LAC No. 253/2011 Page 7 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
Final Hearing
6. At the juncture of final hearing, Shri N S Chechi, Counsel for petitioners and Shri Santosh Yadav, Counsel for UOI / respondents no. 1 and 2 advanced their respective submissions, besides argument of application for striking off the issue no.1. No arguments were advanced on behalf of DDA. The petitioners' counsel has relied upon the decision in LAC no.20/2003.
Findings 7.1 Issue no.1 (1) What is the right, share and interest of petitioners in the acquired land?
7.2 As per nature of issue no.1, the onus lies on the petitioners. However, at the juncture of final arguments, the petitioners filed an application dated 11.11.2014 U/s XIV rule 5 CPC to strike off the issue no.1, since the reference petition is confining to enhancement of compensation, therefore, issue with regard to share, interest or right is not relevant. The court is competent to strike off the issue any time before the judgment.
Whereas, respondents have reservations that it was relevant issue based on record, it was framed long back on 31.8.2007 but all of sudden, the application was filed at belated stage. Otherwise, the record LAC No. 253/2011 Page 8 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
of decided reference petition U/s 3031 of the Act 1894 was not produced. The issue cannot be struck off. Now ld. Counsel for petitioners request that although decision of reference petition U/s 3031 of the Act is generally not relevant for decision in reference petition U/s 18 of the Act.
As per proceedings dated 18.12.2007, the petitioners were given time to produce the record of decided petition u/s 3031 of the Act,1894. However, it was 3rd March, 2015, when ld counsel for petitioners have placed on record extract of certified copies of some record of reference petition (LAC no.83/93) U/s 3031 of the Act, 1894. The same is also perused.
7.3. On perusal of record, it is apparent that reference petition under consideration was filed to ascertain market value of land acquired, however, the reference petition is accompanying statement U/s 19 of the Act, 1894, showing not only different share of each petitioner in different khasra numbers vis a vis there was reference U/s 3031 of the Act ( in respect of disputed land measuring 09 bigha 13 biswas (comprising khasra no. 245(15), 281 (110), 265(012), 264(15), 282(25), 283(22) and 284(014) to the court of Additional District Judge, Delhi. In reference petition no LAC 83/93, there are 48 interested persons and 2 disputants LAC No. 253/2011 Page 9 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
shown in memorandum. The present petitioners are at serial no.3,4,5,6 and 7, as per certified record filed. Moreover, there was an application by the petitioners and then statement on their behalf was recorded through their counsel Shri N S Chechi on 16.8.1994, whereby the present petitioners and some other interested persons settled the claim, shown in details (Ex CI, therein), which result into determining the share of each petitioner as 3/80th ( shown at serial number 11,12,13,14 and 15 in Ex CI) in respect of land measuring 09 bigha 13 biswas (comprising khasra no. 245(15), 281 (110), 265(012), 264(15), 282(25), 283(22) and 284(014).
In view of determination of shares of each petitioner to the extend of 3/80th in reference petition U/s 3031 of the Act, 1894 (qua land measuring 9 bigha 13 biswas), the issue no.1 cannot be strike off. In fact nondetermination of this issue may multiply the litigation, in case the petitioners succeed in this petition and share are reagitated in subsequent proceedings/execution petition as rival claims will be made on the basis of share shown in statement U/s 19 of the Act qua such land and no findings in the reference under consideration.
Moreover, the statement U/s 19 of the Act, 1894 names all the five petitioners with description of land under various khasra and in view of LAC No. 253/2011 Page 10 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
determination of rights in reference petition U/s 3031 of the Act, the petitioners have share, rights and interest in land measuring 09 bigha 13 biswas (comprising khasra no. 245(15), 281 (110), 265(012), 264(15), 282(25), 283(22) and 284(014) to the extend of 3/80th each petitioner no. 1 to 5. So far remaining land measuring 11 bigha 17 biswas land of other khasra numbers is concerned, the petitioners will have share to the extend as mentioned in statement U/s 19 of the Act.
Accordingly, the application U/o XIV rule 5 CPC is dismissed and issue no.1 stand disposed off.
8.1 Issue no. 2 and 3 (2) What was the market value of acquired land on the date of issuance of notification U/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act? (3) To what enhanced in compensation, if any, are petitioners entitled?
8.2 These issues are taken together. Issue no.2 is with regard to the market value of land acquired on the date of preliminary notification and Issue no.3 is in respect of enhancement of compensation. As appears, the onus to prove issues lies on the parties. LAC No. 253/2011 Page 11 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
8.3 The rival submission are considered and analyzed in the light of record, statutory provisions of law, precedent and findings arrived & rate determined in other case. The reference petition under section 18 of the Act, is pursuant to dissatisfaction of petitioners to the amount / market value of land determined as compensation on the date of acquisition of land. Section 23(1) of the Act, 1894 lays down the matters to be considered by court in determining the compensation and section 24 of the Act, 1894 talks about the matters to be neglected in determining the compensation. In Adusmilli Gopala Krishna vs. Special Deputy Collector AIR 1980 SC 1870, it was held the court has to consider nature of land, present use and its capacity for higher potential, its precise location in relation to adjoining land, the use to which neighbour land has been put and impact of such use on land acquired, while assessing the compensation. In Tribeni Devi and others vs. The Collector AIR 1972 SC 417, it was held that the principles for determination of compensation payable to owner of land is the market value which is determined by reference to the price which a seller might reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser but as this may not be possible to ascertain with any amount of precision, the Authority charged with the duty to award compensation is bound to make an estimate judged by an objective LAC No. 253/2011 Page 12 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
standard. In Suresh Kumar vs. Town Improvement Trust AIR 1989 SC 1222 it was held that in estimating the market value of land, the proper way to ascertaining the market value of land is by taking into consideration the special value of land, which ought to be attached to the special advantage possessed by the land like its proximity to developed urbanized areas. Further, the court has to ascertain as best as possible from the materials before it what a willing vendor might reasonably expect to obtain from the willing purchaser for the land in that particular position and with that particular potentiality. The value of the potentiality has to be determined on such material as a available and without indulgence in fits of imagination.
8.4 On comparison and analysis of entire submission of parties, although the petitioners stake theirs claims on many aspects on amount of compensation but confines to findings given Ramphool case (Ex P1 supra), which determines market value of land @ Rs.30,500/ per bigha as on 5.7.1973 in the same preliminary notification and award in same village, which is also not disputed by the Union of India. It is settled law, that two equals are to be treated equally. The petitioners cannot be treated differently amongst equals, they are entitled for compensation at LAC No. 253/2011 Page 13 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
the same rate as others were held entitled. Hence, on the date of preliminary notification, the market value of land was @ Rs.30,500/per bigha. The petitioners are entitled for enhanced compensation to @ Rs. 30,500/ per bigha from rate of Rs.6,500/ per bigha awarded by LAC. Accordingly, issue no.2 and 3 stand disposed off in the favour of petitioners and against the respondents jointly and severally.
9. The respondents had objected that Lrs of petitioner no.1 are not entitled for interest for the period beyond 90 days of date of death (of 9.7.2012) since application for bringing Lrs was filed on 1.4.2014 after delay of 17 months, whereas Ld. Counsel for petitioners requests that there is delay for bringing the application but the law is that the reference petition cannot be dismissed nor it can abate, thus that statutory benefits cannot be curtailed; the court may impose reasonable costs for the delay.
It is apparent that there was delay in bringing the application for bringing Lrs of petitioner no.1 delay is for period from 8.10.2012 (after 90 days period from date of death on 9.7.2012) to 1.4.2014 (when application was filed). Either it is period of interest or amount of costs, both may be expressed in monetary terms. There is an occasion to go through law laid down in Jagmohan & other Vs Union of India (131 2006 LAC No. 253/2011 Page 14 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
DLT 374 DB, dod 25.7.2006) that when there is delay in bringing application for bring Lrs name in place of deceased and delay is attributable to applicants, the interest was declined to them. In the present case, there was no explanation tendered by the applicants for delay, therefore, the circumstances are not exception to Jagmohan case (supra). Hence it is held that the petitioner no.1's Lrs are held not entitled for interest for period from 8.10.2012 to 1.4.2014. Accordingly this contention also stand disposed off.
Issue No. 4 - Relief
10. In view of the findings given on Issues no. 1 to 3 and other contention, above, the petitioners are held entitled for enhanced compensation Rs. 30,500/ per bigha from the amount awarded by Land Acquisition Collector, in respect of petitioners' land acquired, also detailed in the statement under section 19 of the Act, 1894, besides 30% solatium under section 23(2) of Act, in lieu of compulsory acquisition of land, interest @ 12% per annum under section 23(1) from the date of notification upto the date of award by LAC or date of taking of possession whichever is earlier; 9% interest on excess amount awarded by court from the date of possession of land to payment of excess amount in the court, LAC No. 253/2011 Page 15 of 16 Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
for one year and 15% per annum interest on such excess amount for subsequent period of one year till amount is deposited in court but the petitioner no.1's Lrs will not be entitled for interest for period from 8.10.2012 to 1.4.2014. The compensation will be disbursed to petitioners in land measuring 09 bigha 13 biswas (comprising khasra no. 245(15), 281 (110), 265(012), 264(15), 282(25), 283(22) and 284(014) to the extend of 3/80th each petitioner no.1 to 5. And for remaining land measuring 11 bigha 17 biswas of other khasra numbers, the petitioners will have share to the extend as mentioned in statement U/s 19 of the Act. The legal heirs of deceased petitioners will be entitled to receive the amount equally amongst themselves .
11. The reference petition stand answered. Both the sides will bear their own costs. Memo of costs be drawn. A copy of this Award be sent to Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi, for necessary information, action and compliance on his part for remitting of amount payable to the petitioners. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (Inder Jeet Singh)
on Tuesday Addl. District Judge02(S)
Phalguna 26,Saka 1936 Saket New Delhi
17.3.2015
LAC No. 253/2011 Page 16 of 16
Om Prakash & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.
LAC No. 253/2011
17.03.2015
Present: Clerk for counsel for Shri N.S. Chechi, Counsel for petitioner
with petitioner no. 4 Shri Vijay Pal.
Proxy counsel for Shri S.K. Puri, Counsel for UOI. Officials of LAC.
Proxy counsel for DDA.
Lastly, case was listed on 10.03.2015 for judgment but the Presiding Officer was on leave till 13.03.2015. It is scheduled today.
It is judgment day.
Vide separate judgment announced today, the reference petition under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 stand answered. Both the sides will bear their own costs. Memo of costs be drawn. A copy of this Award be sent to Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi, for necessary information, action and compliance on his part for remitting of amount payable to the petitioners.
File be consigned to record room.
(Inder Jeet Singh)
ADJ02 (South), Saket
N New Delhi / 17.03.2015
LAC No. 253/2011 Page 17 of 16