Delhi District Court
Priti Sharma vs . Uoi & Ors. on 22 July, 2013
LAC. No. 66/10
Priti Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors.
IN THE COURT OF SH. ALOK AGARWAL, ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE:
DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
LAC No : 66/10
Village : Masoodabad
Award No. : 02/2007-2008
Date of Award : 20.08.2007
In the matter of:-
Smt. Priti Sharma
W/o Shri Piyush Sharma
R/o Village & P.O Najafgarh,
New Delhi.
...Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India
Through Land Acquisition Collector
South-West District, Kapashera,
New Delhi.
2. Delhi Jal Board
Through its Director/ Chief Executive Officer
Jhandelwalan Extension,
New Delhi.
...Respondents
Filed on : 21.10.2010
Reserved on : 20.07.2013
Decided on : 22.07.2013
J U D G M E N T :-
1. This is a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, LAC. No.66/10 Page 1/8 D.O.D 22.07.2013 LAC. No. 66/10 Priti Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors.
1894.
2. Vide notification under Section 4 of LA Act dated 29.08.06 and declaration under Section 6 of LA Act dated 12.10.2006, 351 Bigha 18 Biswa and 05 Biswansi of land forming part of village Masoodabad was notified for acquisition for a public purpose namely, construction of 40 Million Gallon Daily Water Treatment Plant in Dwarka.
3. The Petitioner Priti Sharma W/o Piyush Sharma was bhumidar of a piece of the acquired land as mentioned in statement under Section 19 of LA Act which is extracted below:-
I. Name of petitioner Field No. Total Area Share No. Bigha Biswa 05 Priti Sharma W/o 426/2 2 Bigha 1/1 Piyush Sharma D/o 427 0-03 Mahender Paliwal R/o 428/2 1-17 Najafgarh, New Delhi 429/2 2-00 Kitta 4 6-00 As per the statement, possession was taken on 02.11.06.
4. This statement was admitted as correct by the Counsel for the petitioner, to the extent of khasra numbers and area.
5. For determining the market value of the land with reference to the LAC. No.66/10 Page 2/8 D.O.D 22.07.2013 LAC. No. 66/10 Priti Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors.
date of notification under Section 4 of L.A. Act, the collector relied upon the indicative price fixed by Govt. of NCT of Delhi for agricultural land in Delhi @ Rs. 17,58,400/- per acre as conveyed by the Dy. Secretary ( L.A) Land Building department vide letter No. F-9 (20)/80/L & B/LA/6720 dated 30.08.2005. Therefore, market value of the land under acquisition was determined @ Rs. 17,58,400/- per acre.
6. Aggrieved by market value of his land as determined by the collector, petitioner has filed the present reference petition for enhancement of compensation.
7. The petitioner claimed that the aforesaid land of village Masoodabad was urbanized vide notification dated 13.06.1963. The land ceased to be agricultural land and became urbanized land on the date of issuance of notification.
8. The petitioner assailed the award of the collector on the ground that the collector has simply gone by the minimum rates fixed by the Government and is totally ignored the potential value of the land due to his vicinity as regards its Industrial, commercial and residential areas. The collector has not taken in the account that all the public utilities and other facilities like electricity, transport, hospitals, schools & sports stadium were available very near to the acquired land before the issuance of the notification. It is claimed that the sale price of plots LAC. No.66/10 Page 3/8 D.O.D 22.07.2013 LAC. No. 66/10 Priti Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors.
both residential and commercial in the nearby area and the exorbitant rates at which the gaon sabha land has been alloted in the recent past to other government agencies has been totally ignored by the collector.
9. The claim of the petitioner's is that he is entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- per square meter, solatium at the rate of 30% and the interest as per provisions of Land Acquisition Act, Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre of crops destroyed due to the possession having been taken over by the respondents and other benefits as per provisions of law.
10. Union of India, Delhi Jal Board and DDA have filed their written statements opposing any enhancement of compensation. They have claimed that the LAC has assessed the market value at just and reasonable rates.
11. On pleadings of the parties, the following issues were settled:-
1. What was the market value of the land in question on the date of notification under Section 4 of the L.A. Act?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to enhancement in compensation ? OPP
3. Relief.
12. In support of its claim, petitioner has examined 13 witnesses in all and through them the petitioner has proved on record notification under Section LAC. No.66/10 Page 4/8 D.O.D 22.07.2013 LAC. No. 66/10 Priti Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors.
507 of the MCD Act issued in the year 1963, aksizra of the village, various sale deeds and allotment of land by gaon sabha to Delhi Jal Board and the notification issued from time to time by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi fixing the minimum price of agricultural land for the purpose of acquisition. However, the petitioner mainly relied upon the judgment passed by this court on 27.05.2013 in 'Hari Kishan @ Suresh Parsad Vs. Union of India' LAC No. 67/10, which is proved as Ex.C-1.
13. On behalf of respondent UOI, it's counsel Shri J.R. Mathur, Advocate tendered the photocopy of the award bearing No. 2/07-08 of village Masoodabad as Ex. R1 and also relying upon the evidence led in the leading case titled as 'Hari Kishan @ Suresh Parsad Vs. Union of India' LAC No. 67/10.
14. Ld. Counsel for DDA had adopted the evidence adduced by Union of India.
15. Respondent Delhi Jal Board has also led evidence to the effect that the land has been taken by it from DDA as lease basis in order to show that the compensation is to be paid by DDA and not by Delhi Jal Board.
16. I have heard Sh. B.D. Sharma, Advocate, appearing for petitioner, Shri J.R. Mathur, advocate for UOI, Sh. Arvind Gupta for DDA and Sh. Tarun Kumar for Delhi Jal Board have perused the entire records. My findings on the issues are as under:-
LAC. No.66/10 Page 5/8 D.O.D 22.07.2013 LAC. No. 66/10 Priti Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors. 17. ISSUE NO. 1
All the evidence led by both sides has already been considered in the case of 'Hari Kishan Vs. UOI' LAC No. 67/10 decided on 27.05.2013. The petitioner has himself relied upon the said judgment. The land involved in the said case was also acquired by the same Award No. 02/2007-08 in pursuance of notification under Section 4 of the L A Act issued on 29.08.2006. Market value of the acquired land as the above date of notification under Section 4 of L A Act has been assessed Rs. 25.62 lacs per acre.
18. No evidence showing that the lands of petitioner is superior to the land involved in the case of 'Hari Kishan Vs. UOI' LAC No. 67/10 has been brought on record by the petitioner. Similarly no evidence showing that the lands of petitioner is inferior in any aspect than the land referred to in case of 'Hari Kishan Vs. UOI' LAC No. 67/10 has been adduced by the respondents.
19. It is well settled 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. There is no new evidence to persuade the Court to take a different view in this reference.
20. Therefore, in the present reference market value of land in question shall be the same as was determined by this Court in the case of 'Hari Kishan LAC. No.66/10 Page 6/8 D.O.D 22.07.2013 LAC. No. 66/10 Priti Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors.
Vs. UOI' LAC No. 67/10. Petitioner is therefore entitled to market value @ Rs. 25.62 lacs per acre. Issue No. 1 is decided accordingly.
21. ISSUE NO. 2:-
In view of my decision on issue no. 1, the petitioner is entitled to the enhanced market value of Rs. 25.62 lacs per acre which means an increase of Rs. 8.04 lacs per acre or Rs. 1,67,500/- per bigha. He shall also be entitled to the other statutory benefits.
22. Relief: -
(i) Petitioner is entitled to receive compensation @ Rs. 25.62 lacs per acre i.e. an increase of Rs.
8.04 lacs per acre or Rs. 1,67,500/- per bigha in respect of land and share as detailed in para 3.
(ii)Petitioner is entitled to receive 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 LA Act i.e. 29.08.2006 till petitioner was actually deprived of the possession and use of the land.
(iii) Petitioner is entitled to receive solatium @ 30% on the enhanced compensation under Section 23 (2) of LA Act.
(iv) Petitioner is entitled to receive interest @ 9% per annum for first year from date of possession LAC. No.66/10 Page 7/8 D.O.D 22.07.2013 LAC. No. 66/10 Priti Sharma Vs. UOI & Ors.
and @ 15% per annum for subsequent period till compensation is paid to the petitioner or deposited in the court.
23. The reference is answered accordingly. Let a copy of the judgment be sent to the LAC(SW) for information and necessary action. Let the compensation be calculated by LAC and disbursed to petitioner after deducting compensation already paid. Decree be prepared in terms of judgment and file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court on 22nd day of July, 2013 (ALOK AGARWAL) ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI LAC. No.66/10 Page 8/8 D.O.D 22.07.2013