Himachal Pradesh High Court
Sh. Lakshmi Ram And Others vs State Of H.P And Others on 20 May, 2015
Author: Dharam Chand Chaudhary
Bench: Dharam Chand Chaudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
RFA No. 324 of 2008 .
Decided on: 20th May, 2015 Sh. Lakshmi Ram and others .......Appellants.
Versus State of H.P and others. ...Respondents. Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the appellants: Mr. B.C. Verma, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. D.S. Nainta, Addl. A.G with
r Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Dy. A.G.
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, Judge (Oral).
This appeal is directed against the award dated 25.08.2008 passed in Reference Petition No. 6-S/4 of 08/06 allowing thereby the petition and enhanced the compensation of the acquired land @ `8,000/- per biswa.
2. The petitioners are before this Court, as according to them, the compensation awarded is inadequate and not as per the market value of the acquired land. The complaint is that the trial Court has erred in ignoring the sale instances Ext. PW-1/A and Ext.
1Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:13:25 :::HCHP 2PW-2/A duly proved on record. The findings that these sale instances pertain to village Bihar, whereas, the .
acquired land is situated in Chak Jungle Tutikandi are without any substance for the reason that the Collector himself while returning the market value of the land has taken into consideration the average sale price of the land in Chak Bihar. The sale instances Ext. PW-1/A and Ext. PW-2/A being in proximity to the issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act should have not been ignored. The same rather should have been taken into consideration to determine the market value of the acquired land. The market value of the land though has been claimed to be approximately `8,00,000/- per bigha on the basis of sale instance Ext.
PW-1/A and Ext. PW-2/A, however, after adjustment of the compensation already awarded, the petitioners have restricted their claim only to `5,00,000/- per bigha.
3. Mr. B.C. Verma, learned counsel has argued that learned trial Court has not considered the evidence available on record in its right perspective and assessed the market value of the land @ `8,000/- per biswa at his ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:13:25 :::HCHP 3 own being not supported by any evidence. He has also argued that sale instances produced in evidence .
though pertain to small chunk of land, however, in view of the acquired land is also not much as well as the sale instances of big chunk of land being not available, the same should have been relied upon and the market value determined on the basis thereof.
4. Mr. D.S. Nainta, learned Additional Advocate General while repelling the submissions so made has pointed out that the Collector has assessed the market value of the land as per price prevalent at the relevant time. The award passed being legally and factually sustainable, therefore, calls for no interference.
5. On analyzing the rival submissions and also the evidence available on record, it is apparent that land bearing Khasra No. 161/1 measuring 0-02-22 hectares belonging to the appellants-petitioners has been acquired for lying sewerage line situated in village Chak Jungle Tutikandi. Reference to this effect can be made to the Notification under Sections 4, 6 and 7 of the Land Acquisition Act. Reference in this regard can be ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:13:25 :::HCHP 4 made to the award statement showing the compensation paid, available in trial Court record. On .
behalf of the petitioners, sale instances Ext. PW-1/A and Ext. PW-2/A have been pressed into service. Ext. PW-1/A is the sale deed dated 28th January, 2002. The same has been proved by PW-1 Sewak Ram, who thereby has sold four biswas of land to one Smt. Ganga Dassi in a sum of `1,25,000/-. Similarly, sale deed dated 30th April, 2001 Ext.
PW-2/A has been proved by PW-2 Jia Lal, who thereby has sold four biswas of land in a sum of `1,47,500/-. It is seen that the sale instance Ext. PW-1/A being dated 28th January, 2002 is in proximity with the Notification under Section 4 of the Act, which has been issued on 8th May, 2003. As per this document, four biswas of land has been sold in a sum of `1,25,000/-. The market value of the land so sold comes to `31,250/- per biswa. No doubt, as per Ext. PW-2/A, the market value of four biswas of land was `1,47,500/-, however, it would not be proper to place reliance thereon. Now, coming to the question that the sale instance Ext. PW-1/A pertains to sale of small chunk, it would not be improper to ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:13:25 :::HCHP 5 conclude that even the acquired land of various right holders also was not in big chunks, however, area .
thereof is also very small. The Apex Court in (2003) 12 Supreme Court Cases 334 titled Land Acquisition Officer, Kammarapally, Village Nizamabad District, A.P versus Nookala Rajamallu and others has held that the rates of to necessary r to small plots can only be taken into consideration subject deductions/adjustments i.e. developmental charges etc. In this case when the land towards has been acquired for lying sewerage line, no investment is required to be made on developmental activities like creation of parks, roads, drains etc. etc. Otherwise also, Chak Jungle Tutikandi is nearby Shimla town and surrounded by forests and hills. There is no question of sale of big chunks of land in that area.
Therefore, placing reliance on the sale instance Ext. PW-
1/A, this Court determines the market value of the acquired land @ `31,250/- per biswa. I am not in agreement with learned trial Court that this sale instance being of village Bihar and that the acquired land is situated in village Jungle Tutikandi, cannot be relied ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:13:25 :::HCHP 6 upon for the reason that the Collector himself while making the award has assessed the market value of the .
land on the basis of average sale price of the land in village Bihar. Otherwise also, both villages are adjoining to each other. It has been so mentioned by the Collector in the award No. 22 of 2005 passed in this case.
Not only this, but the Collector has also noticed that no sale instance has taken place in village Jungle Tutikandi within a period of one year preceding Notification under Section 74 of the Act. Learned trial Court, therefore, has erred in law in not placing reliance on the sale instance Ext. PW-1/A. The impugned award is, therefore, quashed and set aside. The market value of the acquired land is determined at the rate of `31,250/- per biswa.
6. The petitioners, therefore, are entitled to the compensation @ `31,250/- per biswa of the acquired land. On the market value of the acquired land so determined, they are entitled to an additional amount calculated @ 12% per annum thereon from the date of publication of the Notification under Section 4 of the Act to the date of award of the Collector. The petitioners ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:13:25 :::HCHP 7 are also entitled to compulsory acquisition charges @ 30% per annum on the market value so assessed. They .
are also entitled to the interest on the enhanced amount of compensation @ 9% per annum from the date of publication of the Notification under Section 4 of the Act over a period of one year and thereafter @ 15% per r to annum till the payment or deposit in the Court.
7. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
May 20 2015 (Dharam Chand Chaudhary)
(naveen) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 18:13:25 :::HCHP