Delhi District Court
Sh. Mohan Lal Ghai vs Union Of India on 12 January, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJAY KUMAR, ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT JUDGE-02, WEST, DELHI.
LAC No. 113/11
Unique Case ID No. 02401C0436072011
Area: Property No. 69/1A to 69/6A, Najafgarh Road
Industrial Area, Patel Road, New Delhi.
Award No.: 02/DC (W)/2006-07 dated 30.08.2006
Sh. Mohan Lal Ghai
S/o lateSh. Ram Lal Ghai
Shop No. 1, Property No. 69/3A,
Patel Road Industrial Area,
New Delhi ....Petitioner
versus
1. UNION OF INDIA
Through Land Acquisition Collector,
District West, Rampura, Delhi.
2. Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Through its Commissioner,
Town Hall, New Delhi-110006. .....Respondents
Date of institution of the case : 17.09.2011
Date of reserving of judgment : 02.01.2016
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 12.01.2016
(Reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act)
JUDGMENT
1. The Government of NCT of Delhi acquired total land measuring 11785.82 sq. meter under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') vide notification no. F.7(7)/03/L&B/LA/9174 dated 03.09.2003 also under Section 6 vide notification no. F.7(7)/03/L&B/LA/9375 dated 02.09.2004. The land was LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 1/10 notified under Section 17 vide notification no. F.7(7)/03/L&B/LA/9376 dated 02.09.2004. The land was acquired for the purpose of construction of the Grade/Flyover at Najafgarh Road & Patel Road Intersection near Moti Nagar.
2. The Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as 'the Collector') passed award no. 02/DC (W)/2006-2007 dated 30.08.2006 under Section 11 of the Act. The Collector determined the market value of the land under acquisition @ Rs.20,900/- per square meter. The structure also valued as per valuation report submitted by MCD. The structure of the petitioner assessed as per Award for value of Rs.31642/-.
3. According to statement of Section 19 of the Act filed by the Collector, separate reference was made to the court, which was decided in case LAC No. 93/09/06 titled as Union of India vs. Anirudh Sharma and others and was numbered as IP No. 8 as per judgment dated 17.07.2009. As per judgment dated 17.07.2009, the matter was compromised and settled in that court as well as before Mediation Cell, so the compromise was accepted and an amount of Rs.641944.57 was decided for the IP No. 8.
4. The petitioner filed the application under Section 18 of the Act against the findings and determination of the market value of the land/property made by the Land Acquisition Collector, West (hereinafter referred to as 'LAC (West)').
LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 2/10
5. In brief, the facts stated by the petitioner are that he is an Interested person in acquired land having structure of industrial shop no. 1 in property no. 69/3A, Patel Road Industrial Area, New Delhi measuring 9'x50' sq. ft. (hereinafter referred to as 'premises in question'). No other person other than the petitioner has any right, title, interest to seek compensation in respect of tenancy right as assessed by the Court of Ld. ADJ under Section 30-31 of the Act. The petitioner was not served with any notice under Section 12 (2) of the Act nor he was preset at the time of announcement of the Award. The petition is, therefore, within time.
6. It is further stated that the Collector has assessed the compensation to Rs.20,900/- per sq. meter in his award. Similarly, the market value of the structure has also been assessed at very low rate. The petitioner has not accepted the compensation as the market value of the land assessed by the LAC is on very lower side. The LAC has ignored the fact that the L & DO, Ministry of Urban Development, Govt. of India has fixed the market value for the purpose of transfer of the leased properties from one person to other for the purpose of determining the unearned increase for the similarly situated land @ Rs.24,150/- per sq. meter vide notification dated 16.04.1999, which rates are valid up to 31 st March, 2000. The rate fixed by the L & DO are also very much on the lower side.
7. It is further stated that Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and Hon'ble Supreme Court have fixed at least 12% increase per year in the value of the land in Delhi. The LAC erred in taking into consideration only one sale deed without LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 3/10 examining the seller and the purchaser regarding genuineness of the transaction. The LAC also erred in not taking into consideration that the plots in the same vicinity were sold in open auction by DDA @ Rs.50,000/- per sq. meter, which was away from the main Patel Road. It is further stated that the market value of the land of the petitioner is in any case not less than Rs.1 lac per sq. meter. The LAC has also not taken into consideration the fact that the land in question was a freehold land and was a commercial-cum-industrial site. The LAC has also not taken into consideration that all the amenities and facilities of life like transport, bus service, telephone, electricity etc. were available and School, Colleges, banks, fully developed markets, commercial Malls were situated near the land of the petitioner. The LAC has also failed to take into consideration that the petitioner has not been allotted any alternative accommodation. The petitioner has suffered a permanent loss of earning of Rs.10 lacs. The LAC has failed to allow interest on the value of the structure.
8. It is prayed by the petitioner that he be paid market value of the land @ Rs.1 lac per sq. meter along with value of structure decided by the Court under Section 30-31 of the Act besides additional amount @ 12% from the date of notification till the date of taking over possession, interest @ 9% on the market value, 30% solatium and additional interest @ 9% on the compensation from the date of taking possession for the first year and thereafter @ 15% till the amount may be enhanced.
9. Respondent no.1/ Union of India filed written LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 4/10 statement and taken Preliminary Objections that the Land Reforms Act is not applicable in the land in dispute. The petitioner is not a recorded owner, therefore, not entitled to claim compensation or enhancement. It is stated that the land is not surrounded by any developed or underdeveloped colony and can only be used for agriculture purposes. On merits, all the averments are denied. It is stated that the compensation has been legally and correctly assessed by LAC and the same is adequate and just. The conclusion arrived at by LAC is based upon cogent reasons and evidence, therefore, petitioner is not entitled for enhancement of compensation as alleged. It is stated that the petitioner is also not entitled for compensation of any loss of earnings.
10. Respondent no. 2 also filed a detailed reply and taken preliminary objections that present petition is not maintainable. It is stated that after the pronouncement of award, certain facts are found which needs consideration. It is stated that the Delhi Impro0vement Trust, now Delhi Development Authority, made and sanctioned a plan for development of Industrial Area on the Najafgarh Road, Delhi. Out of which plot no. 69 measuring 12.41 acres of land was sold to Rai Bahadur Gujjar Mal Modi vide agreement dated 17.08.1948. Thereafter, he sold the land to Shri Jiwan Lal Virmani vide sale deed dated 22.03.1950. A proposal for subject petition of the plot no. 69 submitted for approval in the year 1973. It was put up before Standing Committee and same was approved vide Resolution No. 1294 dated 31.05.1973. It is stated that the said Virmani family took full benefit of the said resolution and got the land sub-divided and used/sold the sub-divided plots to India Export House but LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 5/10 did not fulfill the other conditions of the resolution which were in favour of the MCD or the general public. Thus the resolution lapsed. It is stated that between MCD and M/s. India Export Pvt. Ltd., there was a huge correspondence, according to which the land required for road widening free of cost to the answering respondents. In the reply, several standing resolutions are mentioned.
11. It is stated that writ petition bearing no. 1289/95 was also filed in the Hon'ble High Court by India Export Pvt. Ltd. It is stated that the entire land measuring 12.41 acres would be treated as one transaction and sub division in favour of individuals would be referred as per Section 312, 313 of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. It is stated that the reference is barred by limitation. On merits, it is stated that the petitioner is not entitled for further enhancement of compensation, rather compensation amount paid by MCD or LAC required to be revoked in the light of resolution of MCD of the year 1973 and 1996. It is stated that the petition is liable to be dismissed.
12. After filing of written statements by respondents, as per record, no replication filed by petitioner.
13. My Ld. Predecessor vide order dated 09.08.2012 framed the following issues:
1. What was the market value of the land in question on the date of notification u/s 4 of the Land Acquisition Act? OPP LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 6/10
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for enhancement of the compensation in respect of land and if so, at what rate? OPP
3. Relief.
14. Petitioner in support of his case examined Ms. Dimple Dhamija, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner, who tendered certified copy of judgment dated 08.04.2009 bearing LAC No. 49/08/07 in case titled as 'M/s. India Export House Pvt. Ltd. vs. UOI & Ors.' as Ex. P1. She further tendered the copy of the certified copy of judgment dated 17.07.2009 in case bearing LAC No. 93/09/06 as Mark A. Respondent no.1/ UOI examined Sh. Vijay Shrma, Ld. Counsel, who tendered the copy of Award No. 02/DC(W)/2006-07 as Ex. R-1. Respondent no.2/MCD examined Sh. R.P. Gautam, Asstt. Commissioner (Retd.) as R2W1, Ms. Brahmjot Kaur, Assistant Town Planner as R2W2 and Sh. R.K. Sharma, A.E. (Building) Headquarter as R2W3.
15. I have heard Ms. Dimple Dhamija, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner, Sh. Vijay Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.1 and Sh. Umesh Gupta, Ld. Counsel for the respondent no.2 and perused the record. My issue wise findings are as under:
ISSUE NOS. 1 & 216. The petitioner relied on judgment of M/s. India Export Pvt. Ltd. Vs. UOI, bearing LAC No. 49/08, wherein the court has determined the fair market value of the land involved and acquired vide Award No. 02/DC(W)/2006-07, LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 7/10 part of the same award as of the present petition. On the other hand, UOI relied on the award Ex. R-1 passed by the Collector. MCD examined three witnesses. The facts deposed by all the witnesses pertain to a dispute pending in the Hon'ble High Court with M/s. India Export Pvt. Ltd. Secondly, the affidavits also mentioned about the fact that the MCD has challenged the award of Collector. However, there is no issue on this aspect as deposed by MCD witnesses. The evidence led by MCD is silent on the aspect of enhancement of market value as claimed by the petitioner. This Court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the legality of the award as now claimed by respondent no.2, when the matter is already subjudice before the Hon'ble High Court.
17. In these circumstances, the law is well settled that the market value already determined vide judgment dated 08.04.2009 bearing LAC No. 49/08/07 in case titled as 'M/s. India Export House Pvt. Ltd. vs. UOI & Ors.' and same is applicable in the present case as well. Reliance is also placed on 'Nand Ram & Ors. vs. The State of Haryana', JT 1988 (4) SC 260.
18. Hence, in view of the above observation and discussion, the petitioner is entitled to fair market value of the compensation to be paid to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.28,438.53 per square meter. Petitioner is thus entitled to enhancement of compensation to the tune of Rs.7,538.53 along with 30% solatium. Petitioner is also entitled to additional amount at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of notification till the date of possession i.e. 03.09.2003 to 27.12.2004 as per provisions of Section 23 (1-A) of the Land LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 8/10 Acquisition Act. Petitioner shall be entitled to the interest at the rate of 9% for first year from the date of taking of possession of land in question and 15% for subsequent years till the entire payment of compensation is made as per Section 28 of the Act.
19. Accordingly, issue nos. 1 & 2 are decided in favour of petitioner and against the respondents.
ISSUE NO. 3 (RELIEF)
20. In view of the above observations and discussion, the reference is disposed of by holding that the compensation awarded to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.20,900/- per sq. meter by LAC was inadequate and unreasonable. Petitioner was required to be paid compensation to be paid to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.28,438.53 (Rupees twenty eight thousand four hundred thirty eight and paisa fifty three only) per square meter. Petitioner is thus entitled to enhancement of compensation to the tune of Rs.7,538.53 (Rupees seven thousand five hundred thirty eight and paisa fifty three only) along with 30% solatium. Petitioner is also entitled to additional amount at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of notification till the date of possession i.e. 03.09.2003 to 27.12.2004 as per provisions of Section 23 (1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act. Petitioner shall be entitled to the interest at the rate of 9% for first year from the date of taking of possession of land in question and 15% for subsequent years till the entire payment of compensation is made as per Section 28 of the Act.
LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 9/10
21. The petitioner is entitled to enhanced compensation as per judgment dated 17.07.2009, titled 'Union of India vs. Sh. Anirudh Sharma & Others' passed by Sh. Ashwani Kumar Sarpal, Ld. Additional District Judge, Delhi in reference under Section 30-31 of the Act.
22. A copy of the judgment be sent to Land Acquisition Collector (West) for information and necessary action.
23. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
24. File be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court today the 12th January, 2016.
(Sanjay Kumar) ADJ-02,West/Delhi 12.01.2016 LAC No. 113/11 Mohan Lal Ghai vs. UOI & Anr. 10/10