Delhi District Court
Kulwanti vs Uoi & Others on 14 July, 2014
LAC no. 64/14
Kulwanti vs UOI & Others
Village Bamnoli
Award No.01/200708
IN THE COURT OF SH. RAJ KUMAR TRIPATHI,
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE04,
SOUTH WEST DISTRICT, NEW DELHI.
LAC. No. : 64/14
Village : Bamnoli
Award No. : 01/200708
Date of Award: 06.08.2007
Computerized ID no. 02405C0296592012
In the matter of:
Smt. Kulwanti,
W/o Sh. Maya Ram,
R/o VPO Bamnoli,
Dwarka, New Delhi110072
...Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India
Through Land Acquisition Collector,
(South West) D.C. Office
at Old Terminal Tax Building,
Kapashera, New Delhi.
2. Delhi Development Authority
Through its ViceChairman
At Vikas Sadan, I.N.A Market,
New Delhi.
...Respondents
1 of 8
LAC no. 64/14
Kulwanti vs UOI & Others
Village Bamnoli
Award No.01/200708
Reference Petition received on : 15.12.2012
Received by way of transfer on : 12.02.2014
Judgment reserved on : 09.07.2014
Decided on : 14.07.2014
J U D G M E N T
This is a reference under Section 18 of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act').
2. Vide notification under Section 4 of The L A Act dated 04.11.2004 and declaration under Section 6 of The L A Act dated 31.10.2005, 2100 Bighas and 06 Biswas of land forming part of village Bamnoli was notified for acquisition for Planned Development of Delhi.
3. The Collector categorized the land in two blocks. In Block A, the land was leveled/low lying up to the depth of 1 meter. In Block B, such land was included from which 'top soil' had been excavated beyond 1 meter. Block B comprises of only 50 Bighas and 13 Biswas of land.
4. The petitioner Smt. Kulwanti was recorded bhumidar of the acquired land as mentioned in statement under Section 19 2 of 8 LAC no. 64/14 Kulwanti vs UOI & Others Village Bamnoli Award No.01/200708 of The L A Act which is extracted below: Name of petitioner Field No. Total Area Date of possession & share Bigha Biswa Smt. Kulwanti W/o 10//6 42 14.09.2007 Sh. Mange Ram 7/2 310 (full share)
5. For determining the market value of the land with reference to the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act, the collector relied upon the indicative price fixed by Govt. of NCT of Delhi for agricultural land in Delhi @ Rs.15,70,000/ per acre as conveyed by the Dy. Secretary (L.A) Land Building Department vide letter No. F9 (2000)/ L & B / LA/ 670412 dated 09.08.2001. Therefore, market value of the land under acquisition was determined @ Rs.15,70,000/ per acre in block A and market value of land in block B was fixed @ Rs.14,13,000 per acre i.e less by 10% of value of land in Block A.
6. Aggrieved by market value of her land as determined by the collector, petitioner has filed the present reference petition for enhancement of compensation.
3 of 8 LAC no. 64/14 Kulwanti vs UOI & Others Village Bamnoli Award No.01/200708
7. Union of India and DDA have filed their written statement opposing any enhancement of compensation.
8. On pleadings of the parties, the following issues were settled:
1. What was the market value of the land in question at the time of notification under Section 4 of the L.A. Act? Onus on parties
2. Whether petitioner is entitled to enhancement in compensation, if yes, to what amount? OPP
3. Relief.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has tendered the certified copy of judgment dated 25.08.2010 passed by Reference Court in LAC No. 93/09/08 titled as 'Jai Prakash v UOI & Another' as Ex.P1 and certified copy of judgment dated 01.02.2012 passed by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in LA Appeal No. 115/2011 titled as 'Jai Prakash v UOI & Another' and connected appeals of village Bamnoli.
10. On behalf of respondent UOI, its counsel Shri S S Dalal, has tendered the award No. 1/200708 as Ex. R1 and the counsel 4 of 8 LAC no. 64/14 Kulwanti vs UOI & Others Village Bamnoli Award No.01/200708 for DDA has adopted the same evidence as led by counsel for UOI.
11. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, LAC and DDA and have perused the entire record. My finding on the issues are as under:
12. ISSUE NO. 1 & ISSUE NO. 2:
What was the market value of the land in question at the time of notification under Section 4 of The L A Act? Onus on parties Whether petitioner is entitled to enhancement in compensation, if yes, to what amount? OPP Both the above issues are taken up together as they require appreciation of same set of facts and evidence.
13. The petitioner has only relied upon the evidence led on behalf of the petitioner in the case titled as 'Jai Prakash v UOI' being LAC No. 93/09/08. In the said case, all the evidence which is brought on record was considered and the market value of the land in village Bamnoli acquired by the same Award was computed at Rs.17,45,000/ per acre for both 'A' and 'B' categories. The said judgment was assailed 5 of 8 LAC no. 64/14 Kulwanti vs UOI & Others Village Bamnoli Award No.01/200708 before Hon'ble High Court in L A appeal no. 115/11 by both the land owners as well as Union of India. The appeals emanating from judgment of Reference Court dated 25.08.2010 were decided by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide judgment dated 01.02.2012, a copy of which has been received in this court, whereby the compensation awarded by the Reference Court for Block 'A' land at Rs.17,45,000/ per acre was upheld. However, compensation for land in block 'B' was fixed at Rs. 17,01,375/.
14. The Reference Court as well as Hon'ble High Court of Delhi have already considered the evidence and material in case of Jai Prakash (supra) regarding fixation of market value. No evidence showing that the land of petitioner is better than the land involved in the case of 'Jai Prakash' has been brought on record by the petitioner. Similarly, no evidence showing that the land of petitioner is inferior in any aspect than the land referred to in case of Jai Prakash has been adduced by the respondents.
6 of 8 LAC no. 64/14 Kulwanti vs UOI & Others Village Bamnoli Award No.01/200708
15. In the case titled as 'Nand Ram verses State of Haryana' (reported as JT 1988 (4) SC 260), it was held that if a compensation amount is already fixed for a land then the same amount of compensation has to be given to the other land owners whose similarly placed land situated adjacent is acquired under the same notification.
16. In view of above, in the present reference market value of land in question shall be the same as was determined by learned predecessor of the court and upheld by the Hon'ble High Court for Block 'A' land as the land of petitioner in reference under Section 18 of LA Act has been reflected as Category 'A' land. This answers the issue no. 1 and
2. Petitioner is held to be entitled for enhanced compensation @ Rs. 1,75,000/ per acre.
17. ISSUE NO. 3 : Relief In view of foregoing discussion, petitioner Smt. Kulwanti is held entitled to the following reliefs: i. Compensation @ Rs. 17,45,000/ per acre i.e. an increase of Rs. 1,75,000/ per acre in respect of the land as mentioned in para 4 herein above.
7 of 8 LAC no. 64/14 Kulwanti vs UOI & Others Village Bamnoli Award No.01/200708 ii. Additional amount @ 12% per annum under Section 23(1A) of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act till the date of taking over of possession.
iii. Solatium @ 30% on the enhanced compensation under Section 23 (2) of LA Act.
iv. Interest on the entire enhanced amount as per (i) to (iii) above @ 9% per annum for first year from date of taking possession of the land and @ 15% per annum for subsequent period till payment of the amount, as per Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act.
18. The reference is answered accordingly. Let a copy of the judgment be sent to the LAC (SW) for information and necessary action. Decree sheet be prepared in terms of judgment and file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court (RAJ KUMAR TRIPATHI) on 14th July, 2014 ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI 8 of 8