Delhi District Court
Sh. Narender Singh (Deceased) Through ... vs Union Of India To Be Served Through on 28 November, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV KUMAR:
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE01: ROHINI COURTS: DELHI.
LAC No.53A/09
UID No.02404C0078052009
IN RE:
1. SH. NARENDER SINGH (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS
a) SMT. GUNWATI - WIDOW
b) SH. JITENDER SINGH - SON
c) SH. JOGINDER SINGH - SON
2. SH. SAJENDER SINGH
3. S. VIRENDER SINGH
BOTH SS/O LATE SH. UMRAV SINGH
4. SH. PARVEEN KUMAR S/O LATE SH. DHUP SINGH
ALL R/O VPO KHERA KHURD NEW DELHI
................PETITIONERS
Vs.
1. UNION OF INDIA TO BE SERVED THROUGH
LAC ( N/W), KANJHAWALA, DELHI.
2. DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION THROUGH ITS SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY, DELHI
............RESPONDENTS
Award No. : 20/0203
Village : Khera Khurd
Date of Award/Date of
Announcement of Award : 09.09.2002
Notification U/S 4 : F.10(20)/2000/L&B/LA/6640
dated 07.08.2000
Notification U/S 6 : F.10(20)/2000/L&B/LA/8578
dated 11.09.2000
LAC No. 53A/09 Page 1 of 13
Date of Receipt of Reference: 18.02.2003
Date of Arguments: 15.11.2011
Date of Judgment: 28.11.2011
REFERENCE PETITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE
LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894
JUDGEMENT
1. A large tract of Land measuring 591 bigha 10 biswa situated in the Revenue state of village Khera Khurd was acquired by the Government vide notification no.F.10(20)/2000/L&B/LA/6640 dated 07.08.2000 under section 4 and 17 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'LA Act'). The Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as LAC) passed the Award bearing no. 20/200203 dated 09.09.02 whereby determined the market value of category 'A' Land @ Rs. 13.82 lacs per acre and category 'B' Land @ Rs. 12.62 per acre.
2. Being dissatisfied with the said market value the petitioner has filed the said present reference u/s 18 of LA Act before LAC who has referred the same to this court.
3. Petitioners have stated in the reference petition that they are recorded bhumidhars of the 1/4th share each of land bearing Khasra no. 14//17(119), 23(208), 24(416), 25/1(405), 15//21(112), 39//1(416), 9/2(112), 10(416), 11/1(104), 40//4(416), 5(412) total measuring 36 bigha and 16 biswas situated in the Revenue Estate of Village LAC No. 53A/09 Page 2 of 13 Khera Khurd, which was acquired by government and LAC has awarded Rs.13.82 per acre for his category 'A' land and Rs.12.62 for category 'B' land. But LAC has not determined the correct market value as per law.
4. Petitioner has challenged the Award on following grounds.
a) That the LAC has assessed the compensation merely on the basis of surmises and conjectures without looking into the market rate of the land prevailing in the area ;
b) that LAC has failed to consider that land of the petitioner has all modern facilities like developed roads, school, telephone, electricity, Hosiptals, Public Schools, Inter College, Degree College, Health Gym, Sport Stadium Modern, Panchayat Ghar, Most frequently served by the DTC and other Private Transport;
c) that LAC has grossly erred in not appreciating the fact that land of petitioners is very fertile and productive and gives atleast three crops in a year and LAC has wrongly placed their land in category 'B';
d) that LAC has erred in considering that land of petitioner is very near to NH1, Narela Township and West Jamuna Canal flows near to the village Khera Khurd, as a result of which land of petitioner gives three crops in a year;
LAC No. 53A/09 Page 3 of 13
e) that LAC has failed to consider that the land of petitioner was having all types of amenities like electricity, drainage, etc. and land is fit for industrial purpose.
5. The petitioner has claimed compensation for the land @ Rs.5,000/ per square yards and also claimed Rs.50,000 per acre for damages done to standing crops and vegetables, Rs.1,00,000 lacs for damages done to trees, and Rs.3,00,000 for serving charges.
6. Both the respondents have filed their respective written statement. In the written statement filed on behalf of UOI, it is stated that Delhi Land Reform Act is applicable to the acquired land. On merit all the averments made in the reference petition are denied and it is stated that LAC has awarded adequate and just compensation, therefore, petitioner is not entitled any enhancement in the compensation.
7. In the written statement filed on behalf of Respondent no. 2 it is stated that DLR Act is applicable to the land and disputer and further stated that petitioner had not filed any claim u/s 9 & 10 of the LA Act as the present reference is time barred. On merit respondent no. 2 also denied the plea made by the petitioner in his claim petition and further it is stated that compensation awarded by LAC is just and adequate.
LAC No. 53A/09 Page 4 of 13
8. During the pendency of case petitioner no. 1 has expired and his LRs as mentioned in the memorandum were substituted in his place.
9. During the admission and denial of the documents petitioner has admitted statement u/s 19 of LA Act.
10. From the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:
1. Whether petitioner is entitled to any enhancement, if so to what amount?
2. Relief.
11. In support of his claim for enhancement of compensation, petitioners have examined 12 witness.
Petitioner no. 2 has examined himself as PW1 and tendered his examination in chief by way of affidavit and also proved the khasra girdawaris for the year 199596 to 19992000 as Ex. PW1/A to Ex. PW1/E respectively, letters dated 22.2.06 and 20.09.06 as Ex. PW1/F and Ex. PW1/G, certified copy of two sale deeds dated 25.04.2001 as Ex. PW1/H and registration certificate of his tractor bearing regn. no. HR10A/3933 as Ex.PW1/I. PW2 Sh. Manoj Kumar, LDC from Land & Building Department has proved the policy of Govt. of NCT, Delhi dated 09.08.2001, 11.09.2001 25.07.1997 & 03.05.1990 as Ex. PW2/1 to Ex. PW2/4 respectively.
LAC No. 53A/09 Page 5 of 13 PW4 Sh. Azad Singh, Office Kanoongo has proved the khasra girdawaries of the year 199697 to 19992000 of khasra no. 14/17, 23, 24, 25/1, 15/21, 39/1, 9/2, 10, 11/1, 40/4, 5 of village Khera Khurd as Ex.PW4/1 to Ex. PW4/4 respectively.
PW6 Sh. R.P. Srivastava Asstt. GradeI from Office of Commissioner of Industries has proved the allotment letter of industrial plot no. 6 measuring 250 sq. mtrs @ Rs.4200/ dated 23.10.2000 as Ex. PW6/1.
PW7 Sh. D.S. Rawat, UDC, SubRegistrar, Office VIA, has proved the sale deed dated 25.04.2001 as Ex. PW1/H. Sh. Santosh Dutt, Patwari who has examined as again PW7, hereinafter read as PW7A has proved the proceeding sheets of award file from page 1N to 7N as Ex. PW7/1, kabza Karyawahi no. 11C to 9C as Ex. PW7/2, chief data vide page 20C to 12C as Ex. PW7/3, list of pits as Ex. PW7/4, and award as Ex. PW7/4. PW8 Sh. U.S. Govil, Executive Engineer, DSIDC has proved consolidated report of expenditure incurred on acquired area of village Khera Khurd as Ex. PW8/1.
PW9 Sh. S.R. Kataria, Joint Commissioner has proved the statements led in case LAC No. 87/05 as Ex.PW9/A (Colly) and LAC No. 53A/09 Page 6 of 13 documents as Ex. PW9/B (Colly).
PW10 Sh. Rajesh Kumar Halka Patwari of village Khera Khurd has proved the Aks Sizra of village Khera Khurd as Ex. PW10/1. PW11 Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Patwari has proved the Masavi Index of village Khera Khurd for the year 198182 showing agricultural land of village Khera Khurd as Ex.PW11/1 and photocopy of the same as Ex. PW11/2.
12. During final arguments Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the evidences and judgment passed in case titled as Haseena Vs. UOI LAC No. 297A/08.
13. On the other hand Ld. Counsel for the respondent has examined RW1 Sh. Bijender Singh, Patwari who has proved the survey report conducted by him as Ex. RW1.
14. During final arguments Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that market value of the present award has already been determined by Hon'ble Justice Pradeep Nandrajog in case titled as Jai Singh Vs. UOI LA Appeal no. 266/08 and requested that same market value be passed in the present case.
LAC No. 53A/09 Page 7 of 13
15. Findings of issue no. 1 15.1 Petitioner has stated in the petition that valuation of land determined by LAC is not reasonable as LAC has not adopted the correct method of valuation. Petitioner has examined 12 witnesses to prove the case.
15.2 However, during final arguments Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that he relied upon the judgment Jai Singh Vs. UOI which is recently decided by Hon'ble Justice Pradeep Nandrajog in LA Appeal no. 266/08 & connected matters dated 23.08.2011, in which Hon'ble Court has determined the market value of the land pertaining to village Khera Khurd acquired through the same award by which land of petitioner has been acquired as Rs.14,83,500/ per acre for category 'A' land. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner further argued that since land of petitioner is levelled land, therefore, entire land be treated as category 'A' instead of category 'B' land and same market value be given to petitioner, as given to category 'A' land holders.
15.3 I have perused the judgment Jai Singh Vs. UOI (Supra).
By this judgment, Hon'ble Justice has determined the market value of the land of many villages including the land of village Khera Khurd, acquired through award no. LAC No. 53A/09 Page 8 of 13 20/0203. In this case as observed in para 61 of the judgment market value has been determined on the basis of minimum price notified by the govt. and also on the basis of sale deed dated 25.05.2002. Para 61 is reproduced as below:
61. I thus hold that pertaining to the notifications dated 7.8.2000, 11.9.2000, 2.5.2001, 22.8.2001 and 7.12.2001 the land prices would have to be determined on the basis of the minimum price notified by the Government as also with reference to the sale deed dated 25.5.2002 for the reason I find no other cogent evidence wherefrom land price as on said dates could be determined. Pertaining to the notifications dated 16.5.2002, 23.5.2002 and 27.1.2003, the land price needs to be determined with respect to the sale deed dated 25.5.2002 because with reference to the said sale price it is apparent that land price as of said date comes to more than if determined with respect to the notification dated 9.8.2001 wherein minimum land price notified was Rs.15.7 lakhs per acre with effect from 1.4.2001.
15.4 Thereafter in para 70 Hon'ble Justice has determined the market value of village Khera Khurd. Relevant para is reproduced below:
Village Khera Khura Notification dated 11.9.2000
70. With reference to the notification dated 9.8.2001 wherein with effect from 1.4.2000 minimum price notified per acre is Rs.13.82 lakhs per acre and requiring said price to be suitably updated to reach the date of the LAC No. 53A/09 Page 9 of 13 notification i.e. 11.9.2000 and with reference to the sale deed dated 25.5.2002 wherein for Category 'C' lands, land price per acre comes to Rs.17,74,109/, rounded off to Rs.17,75,000/ per acre, and for Category 'B' lands increasing the same by 2.5% the price comes to Rs.18.2 lakhs per acre and further increasing by 2.5% the prices comes to Rs.18,65,500/ per acre for Category 'A' lands;
and decreasing the said prices by 11% to reflect the price with reference to the sale deed for the date 11.9.2000; the mean average price for Category 'A' lands in village Khera Khurd comes to Rs.14,83,500/ per acre and decreasing the same by 2.5%, it comes to Rs.14,46,413/ per acre for Category 'B' lands.
71. All Land Acquisition Appeals as per 'GRIDD' filed by the land owners and crossobjections filed by the land owners in appeals filed by Union of India are allowed by decreeing compensation payable for Category 'A' lands in village Khera Khurd pertaining to the notification dated 11.9.2000 in sum of Rs.14,83,500/ per acre for Category 'A' lands and Rs.14,46,413/ per acre for Category 'B' lands. I note that pertaining to this notification and the village, the Union of India has not filed any appeal. On the enhanced compensation statutory benefits as per the Land Acquisition Act 1894 as explained in the judgment reported as Sunder Vs. UOI 2001 (93) DLT 569 shall be granted, except for the period where there is a delay in filing the appeal, for which period of delay no interest on the enhanced compensation shall be paid. These appellants would be entitled to proportionate cost. 15.5 However, on perusal of said para I found that due to typological error date of notification u/s 4 been taken as 11.09.2000 instead on 07.08.2000, which is apparent from the award Ex.R1. It has resulted into determination of LAC No. 53A/09 Page 10 of 13 excess market value as Rs.14,83,500/ per acre instead of Rs.14,75,000/ per acre as determined by Hon'ble High Court in case of village Pooth Kalan, Holambi Kalan and Bawana acquired through notification dated 07.08.2000. Therefore, I am of the view that petitioner cannot be given advantage of the human error and cannot be given market value @ Rs.14,83,500 which is determine by the Hon'ble Judge under the presumption that date of notification u/s 4 is 11.09.2000. Hence, I determine the market value of petitioner's land which is category 'A' land @ Rs.14,75,000/ per acre.
16. Is categorisation justified Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that land of the petitioner is levelled land and LAC has wrongly placed his land in category 'B' land. In support of his contention Ld. Counsel has relied upon the evidence led by petitioner in Haseena Vs. UOI LAC no. 297A/09 decided by this court on 19.11.10, wherein I had set aside the categorisation of land & held that petitioner's 'B' category land shall be treated as category 'A' land. Petitioner has stated that in appeal of the said judgment which was decided alongwith Jai Singh case Hon'ble High Court has not set aside the categorisation, therefore, petitioner's land be also treated as category 'A' land and same market value be given to him. But I am not agree with the said contention of Ld. Counsel for the petitioner. Hon'ble Justice Pradeep LAC No. 53A/09 Page 11 of 13 Nandrajog in para 70 has given two rates one for category 'A' land and other for category 'B' land which means categorisation has been maintained, therefore, I am bound by the said judgment. Therefore, I held that categorisation of land cannot be set aside and petitioner cannot be given compensation of his entire land @ category 'A' land. Hence, I held that petitioner would be entitle to market value of Rs.14,38,175/ for category 'B' land as determined by the Hon'ble High Court for the village in the abovesaid judgment.
17. Besides above, petitioner shall be entitled to other statutory benefit i.e 12% Addl. Amount as per section 23 (1) A & 30% solatium u/s 23 (2) & will be entitle to interest on the market value @ 9% per annum for the first year & 15% for subsequent year till the making of payment of enhanced compensation by LAC as per provision of Section 28 of the Act.
Issue no.1 decided accordingly.
18. Findings on Issue No.2 - RELIEF 18.1 In view of the findings on Issue no.1, the petitioner is entitled to the following reliefs:
a) thus market value of the petitioner's land of category 'A' is fixed at Rs.14,75,000/ per acre and of category 'B' as Rs.14,38,175/ as per statement u/s 19 LA Act ;
b) additional amount u/s 23 (1A) @ 12% p.a., on the LAC No. 53A/09 Page 12 of 13 market value from the date of notification u/s 4 of the LA Act till the date of award or dispossession, whichever is earlier ;
c) solatium u/s 23(2) of LA Act @ 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation ;
d) interest under Section 28 of L.A Act at the rate of 9% per annum for the first year from the date of dispossession and at the rate of 15% per annum on the difference between the enhanced compensation awarded by this court and the compensation awarded by the LAC for the subsequent period till its payment ;
19. Reference is disposed of accordingly. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court (SANJEEV KUMAR
on 28.11.2011 ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE01
ROHINI COURTS, DELHI
LAC No. 53A/09 Page 13 of 13