Himachal Pradesh High Court
General Manager vs Kamla Devi & Others on 1 November, 2018
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
.
RFA No. 316 of 2017 a/w RFAs
No. 263 to 266 of 2017, 317 to
332 of 2017, 334 to 347 of 2017.
Reserved on : 17.09.2018
Decided on : 01.11.2018
___________________________________________________
1. RFA No. 316 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Kamla Devi & others ...Respondents
2. RFA No. 263 of 2017.
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Surinder Singh & others ...Respondents
3. RFA No. 264 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Vinod Kumar & others ...Respondents
4. RFA No. 265 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Manohar Lal & others ...Respondents
5. RFA No. 266 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Manohar Lal & others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP
30
6. RFA No. 317 of 2017
.
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Rameshwar Dutt & others ...Respondents
7. RFA No. 318 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Rameshwar Dutt & others ...Respondents
8. RFA No. 319 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Rameshwar Dutt & others ...Respondents
9. RFA No. 320 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Rameshwar Dutt & others ...Respondents
10. RFA No. 321 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Manohar Singh & others ...Respondents
11. RFA No. 322 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Iqbal Singh & others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP
30
.
12. RFA No. 323 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Iqbal Singh & others ...Respondents
13. RFA No. 324 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Iqbal Singh & others
r ...Respondents
14. RFA No. 325 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Punya Devi & others ...Respondents
15. RFA No. 326 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Punya Devi & another ...
Respondents
16. RFA No. 327 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Karam Singh & others ...Respondents
17. RFA No. 328 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Rustam Singh & others ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP
30
18. RFA No. 329 of 2017
.
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Dilbag Singh (deceased) Pushpa
Devi & others ...Respondents
19. RFA No. 330 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Balwant Singh & another
r ...Respondents
20. RFA No. 331 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Vidya Devi & another ...Respondents
21. RFA No. 332 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Dhian Singh & another ...Respondents
22. RFA No. 334 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Shakin Biwi & another ...Respondents
23. RFA No. 335 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Ranjeet Singh & another ...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP
30
24. RFA No. 336 of 2017
.
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Nazeer Biwi & another ...Respondents
25. RFA No. 337 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Vinod Kumar & another ...Respondents
26. RFA No. 338 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Rattan Chand & others ...Respondents
27. RFA No. 339 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Rukaman Deen & others ...Respondents
28. RFA No. 340 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Rattani Devi & others ...Respondents
29. RFA No. 341 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Krishna Devi (deceased) through her Lrs & others
...Respondents
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP
30
30. RFA No. 342 of 2017
.
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Krishna Devi (deceased) through her Lrs & others
...Respondents
31. RFA No. 343 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Shaukat Ali & others ...Respondents
32. RFA No. 344 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Sugriva Nand Ji and another ...Respondents
33. RFA No. 345 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Chand and others ...Respondents
34. RFA No. 346 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Parkash Chand and others ...Respondents
35. RFA No. 347 of 2017
General Manager, Northern Railway .....Appellant
Versus
Amir Ali and others ...Respondents
___________________________________________________
Coram:
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP
30
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge.
Yes
.
Whether approved for reporting?
For the Appellant (s) : Mr. Rahul Mahajan, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, for
respondents in RFAs No. 264, 316 to
321, 323 to 332, 335 to 339, 341,
342, 344 & 345 of 2017.
Mr. Dheeraj K. Vshisht, Advocate,
for respondents in RFAs No. 341,
342 & 346 of 2017.
Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Senior
Advocate with Ms. Devyani Sharma
and Mr. Dinesh Bhatia, Advocates,
for respondent No. 1 in RFAs No.
340, 343 and 347 of 2017.
Mr. Tek Chand, Advocate vice Mr.
Sanjeev Suri, Advocate, for
respondent in RFA No. 263 of 2017.
Mr. Shiv Pal Manhans, Additional
Advocate General, for the
respondent-State.
None for the respondents in other
appeals.
_________________________ __________________________
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP
30
Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (oral)
.
These appeals arising out of a common award dated 02.04.2016, passed by learned Additional District Judge-II, (hereinafter referred to as 'Reference Court') in Land Reference No. : 1-IV/2012 RBT No. 152/13/12 titled as Joginder Singh (deceased) through his Lrs. Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 2-IV/12 RBT No. 153/2013/12 titled as Satya Prakash (deceased) through his Lrs. Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 3-IV/12 RBT No. 154/2013/12 titled as Satya Parkash (deceased) through his Lrs. Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another;
Land Reference No. : 4-IV/12 RBT No. 155/2013/12 titled as Satya Parkash (deceased) through his Lrs. Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 5-IV/12 RBT No. 156/2013/12 titled as Satya Parkash (deceased) through his Lrs. Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 6-IV/12 RBT No. 157/2013/12 titled as Manohar Singh and others Versus Land ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference .
No. : 7-IV/12 RBT No. 158/2013/12 titled as Iqbal Singh and others Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No.: 8-IV/12 RBT No. 159/2013/12 titled as Iqbal Singh & others Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 9- IV/12 RBT No. 160/2013/12 titled as Iqbal Singh and others Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another;
Land Reference No. : 10-IV/12 RBT No. 161/2013/12 titled as Punya Devi & others Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 11-IV/12 RBT No. 162/2013/12 titled as Punya Devi Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 12- IV/12 RBT No. 163/2013/12 titled as Karam Singh & another Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another;
Land Reference No. : 13-IV/12 RBT No. 164/2013/12 titled as Rustam Singh and another Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 14-IV/12 RBT No. 165/2013/12 titled as Dalbag Singh and another Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 No. : 15-IV/12 RBT No. 166/2013/12 titled as Balwant Singh .
Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another;
Land Reference No: 16-IV/12 RBT No. 167/2013/12, titled as Vidya Devi Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 17-IV/12 RBT No. 168/2013/12 titled as Dhian Singh Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another;
r Land Reference No. : 18-IV/12 RBT No. 104/2013/12 titled as Paro Devi & another Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 19-IV/12 RBT No. 103/2013/12, titled as Surinder Singh & others Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 20-IV/12 RBT No. 117/2013/12 titled as Shakin Biwi Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 21-IV/12 RBT No. 116/2013/12 titled as Ranjeet Singh Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 22-IV/12 RBT No. 115/2013/12 titled as Nazeer Biwi Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another;
Land Reference No. : 23-IV/12 RBT No. 114/2013/12 titled as Vinod Kumar & others Versus Land Acquisition Collector ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 24-IV/12 RBT .
No. 113/2013/12 titled as Vinod Kumar Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 25-IV/12 RBT No. 112/2013/12, titled as Manohar Lal and another Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 26-IV/12 RBT No. 111/2013/12, titled as Manohar Lal & another Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 27-IV/12 RBT No. 110/2013/12 titled as Rattan Chand & others Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 28-IV/12 RBT No. 100/2013/12, titled as Rukaman Deen Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and others; Land Reference No. : 29-IV/12 RBT No. 102/2013/12 titled as Rattani Devi Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and others; Land Reference No. : 30-IV/12 RBT No. 101/2013/12 titled as Krishna Devi (deceased) through her Lrs. & others Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and others; Land Reference No. : 31-IV/12 RBT No. 99/2013/12 titled as Krishna Devi (deceased) through her Lrs. & others Versus Land ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 Acquisition Collector (Railway) and others; Land Reference .
No. : 32-IV/12 RBT No. 109/2013/12 titled as Shaukat Ali Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and others; Land Reference No. : 33-IV/12 RBT No. 108/2013/12 titled as Sugriva Nand Ji Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and another; Land Reference No. : 34-IV/12 RBT No. 107/2013/12, titled as Ramesh Chand & another Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and others; Land Reference No. : 36-IV/12 RBT No. 106/2013/12 titled as Parkash Chand Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and others and Land Reference No. : 37-IV/12 RBT No. 118/2013/12 titled as Amir Ali Versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) and others; are being decided by this common judgment, as common questions of law and facts, based on the identical evidence led in lead case, are involved therein.
2. Government of Himachal Pradesh, for expansion/construction of Nangal-Talwara Broad Gauge Railway Line, had acquired land in village Athwan, Tehsil Amb, District Una, after initiating acquisition process by issuing notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), which was published .
on 24.04.2009. After completing the process under the Act, the Land Acquisition Collector, (Railway), Una, Distt. Una (hereinafter referred to as Land Acquisition Collector) had announced Award No. 3/2009-10 under Section 11 of the Act on 06.05.2010 assessing the market value of the acquired land on the basis of nature and classification as under:-
Sr.No. Class of land Rate per sq. m. Rate per Sq.m.
within radius of beyond 40 m
40 m of N.H. of N.H.
i) Kuhli Abbal/ 575/- 450/-
Gair Mumkin
Abadi.
ii) Barani Abbal 560/- 450/-
iii) Banjar Kadeem/ 400/- 300/-
other Gair Mumkin
3. Land owners/claimants, for enhancement of
compensation, had preferred reference petitions under Section 18 of the Act which were clubbed together, wherein evidence was led only in one lead case, i.e. Land Reference No. : 1-IV/2012 RBT No. 152/13/12, titled as Joginder Singh (deceased) through his Lrs. Versus Land Acquisition Collector ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 (Railway) and another. After considering the evidence on .
record Reference Court vide the impugned award has re-
determined uniform value of land at the rate of Rs.1,000/-
per square meter alongwith statutory benefits thereupon irrespective of classification and category of the land.
4. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with award passed by the Reference Court, Northern Railway has preferred present appeals under consideration.
5. Land owners/claimants have examined four witnesses to substantiate their claim. PW-1 Anil Kumar and PW-4 Neeraj Kumar are Architects, who have been examined to establish the valuation of buildings/structures of Satya Parkash and Iqbal Singh. PW-2 Sat Pal is Pradhan of the concerned Gram Panchayat, who has been examined to prove the nature, location and potentiality of the acquired land. PW-3 Rameshwar Dutt, one of the landlords/claimants, has been examined on behalf of all the landlords/claimants to substantiate their claim.
6. The Northern Railway has examined RW-1 Madan Lal, Kanungo (Railway), Una, Himachal Pradesh to support ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 valuation of Land Acquisition Collector and to rebut the claim .
of the land owners.
7. For establishing claim with respect to structures/buildings of Satya Parkash, PW-1 has proved on record valuation Ext. PW-1/A, description of property Ext.
PW-1/B, ground floor plan Ext. PW-1/C and estimate Ext.
PW/1/D. Similarly,
r abstracts of cost of two
structures/buildings of Iqbal Singh have been proved as Ext.
PW-4/A & Ext. PW/4/D alongiwth calculations thereof Ext.
PW/4/B & Ext. PW-4/E and site plans Ext. PW/4/C and Ext.
PW-4/F. Jamabandis of land in question have also been placed on record as Ext. P-1 to Ext. P-23. As an exemplar transaction, land owners have put reliance on award passed by the Reference Court in another case bearing Land Reference No. 8/2013/2012, titled as Chain Singh & another versus Land Acquisition Collector (Railway) & others (Ext. P-
24), relating to acquisition of land in village Adarsh Nagar, Tehsil Amb for the same purpose initiated vide notification under Section 4 of the Act, dated 24.04.2009, wherein, the Reference Court had awarded uniform rate of compensation ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per square meter. Reliance has .
also been placed on another award passed by the Reference Court in Land Reference RBT No. 49/2013/12, titled as Yash Pal versus The Land Acquisition Collector & another (Ext. P-
25), wherein also, for acquisition of land for the same purpose by issuing notification under Section 4 of the Act, published on 24.04.2009, value of the land acquired in Village Kalroohi, Tehsil Amb, Distt. Una has been determined at uniform rate to the tune of Rs. 1,000/- per square meters.
8. In its evidence, Northern Railway has placed on record copy of notification under Section 4 of the Act (Ext.
RW-1/A) and notification under Section 6 of the Act (Ext. RW-
1/B), Award No. 3/2009-10, passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (Ext. RW-1/C) alongwith Vivaran Talika 19, under Section 18 of the Act (Ex.RW-1/D) but related to Joginder Singh only. Further reliance has also been placed by Northern Railways on Sale Deeds Ext. R-1 dated 12.06.2008, R-2 dated 19.03.2009, R-3 dated 13.10.2007, R-4 dated 04.04.2008, R-5 dated 30.05.2008 and R-6 dated 11.06.2008.
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 309. Reference Court has taken into consideration .
exemplar Award Ext. P-25 pertaining to the adjoining village and has awarded the same rate i.e. Rs.1,000/- per square meter in present case also.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant(s) has submitted that the Reference Court has committed an illegality by relying upon the awards Ex. P-24 and Ext. P-25 belonging to different villages as there is no evidence on record to establish that nature and potential of the land in Village Athwan and that of Villages Adarsh Nagar and Kalroohi was the same and in absence of evidence that Villages Adarsh Nagar and Kalroohi are adjacent to Village Athwan these awards could not have been taken into consideration for determining the value of acquired land.
According to him, land under acquisition, in the present case, is different in nature and there is no evidence of similarity of the same with the land of villages involved in Ext. P-24 and Ext. P-25 and, therefore, for different nature and potentiality of land, compensation at different rate is required to be determined.
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 3011. Judgment of the apex Court in case titled as Jai .
Prakash and others versus Union of India, reported in (1997) 9 Supreme Court Cases 510, has also been relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant(s), wherein it has been held that merely because in some neighbouring vil-
lages, valuation has been made at a higher rate, it cannot be said that the claimants-land owners must also be given the same rate of compensation.
12. Reliance has also been placed by learned counsel for the appellant(s) on para 9 of the judgment rendered by the apex Court in case titled as Kanwar Singh and others versus Union of India, reported in (1998) 8 Supreme Court Cases 136, wherein the Apex Court has held that generally, there would be different situation and potentiality of land situated in two different villages and unless it is proved that the situation and potentiality of the land in two different villages are the same, the same rate of compensa-
tion, as awarded to the land owners of one village cannot be granted to the land owners of the another village for the ac-
quisition of land for the same purpose.
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 3013. Pronouncement of the apex Court in case titled as .
Manoj Kumar etc. versus State of Haryana, reported in 2017 SCC Online SC 1262, has also been relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant(s) wherein also it has been held that in absence of evidence of similarity of nature and potential of the land, previous judgment and award can-
not be made basis for awarding same compensation to the land owners of the adjacent villages.
14. On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for land owners/claimants while referring the judgment, titled as Ali Mohammad Beigh & other Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir reported in (2017)4 SCC 717, have justified the value re-determined by the Reference Court on the basis of Award Ext. P-24, with submissions that there is ample evi-
dence on record to infer that the value of land in Village Ath-
wan is equivalent to the value of land of Villages Adarsh Na-
gar and Kalroohi and thus keeping in view the nature and contents of the evidence on record Reference Court has rightly awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per square meters, as awarded in Ext. P-24 and Ext. P-25. It is ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 further contended that the Award passed in Yash Pal's case .
Ext. P-25, has attained finality, as the same has been af-
firmed by this Court vide judgment dated 26.07.2018, passed in RFA No. 388 of 2016 alongwith connected matters, titled as General Manager, Northern Railways versus Yash Pal and another.
15. The Apex Court in case titled as Periyar and Par-
keekanni Rubbers Ltd. Versus State of Kerala, reported in 1991) 4, Supreme Court Cases 195, has held that when the Courts are called upon to fix the market value of the land in compulsory acquisition, the best evidence of the value of property is the sale of acquired land to which the claimant himself is a party, in its absence the sales of the neighbouring lands; and the transaction relating to the ac-
quired land of recent dates or in the neighbourhood lands that possessed of similar potentiality of fertility or other ad-
vantageous features are relevant pieces of evidence.
16. The Apex Court in case titled as Special Land Ac-
quisition Officer Kheda and another vs. Vasudev Chan-
drashankar and another, reported in (1997) 11 SCC 218 has ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 ruled that award passed by Reference Court in another case .
subject to certain conditions, also offers a comparable base for determination of the compensation.
17. Ratio of law in above referred pronouncement is that in absence of availability of comparable sales in village/area, of which land is under acquisition, transaction relates to acquired land of recent dates or same dates in the neighbourhood lands, that possessed similar potentiality of fertility or other advantageous factors, are also relevant piece of evidence. However, for that purpose, nature and potentiality of land in two different villages should be the same for awarding the same rate of compensation in acquisi-
tion of land for the same purpose.
18. It also now well settled that where the purpose for acquisition of land is common and the acquired land is to be put in use for one and the same purpose irrespective of its nature and classification, an uniform rate notwithstanding the nature and classification of land is to be awarded for the said land. (See: LAC and another versus Bhoop Ram and an-
other, reported in 1997(2) Shimla Law Cases, 229, Smt. Gulabi & ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 others versus State of H.P., reported in AIR 1998 HP 9, Housing .
Board versus Ram Lal and others, reported in 2003 (3) Shimla Law Cases 64, Union of India versus Harinder Pal Singh and others, reported in 2005 (12) SCC 564; Executive Engineer and another versus Dila Ram, reported in Latest HLJ 2008 (HP), 1007, G.M. Northern Railways versus Gulzar Singh and others, reported in Latest HLJ 2014 (HP) 775, Dadu Ram versus Land Ac-
quisition Collector and others, reported in (2016 2 ILR 636 (HP).
19. As per Section 25 of the Act, the amount of com-
pensation awarded by the Court shall not be less than the amount awarded by the Collector under Section 11 of the Act. (Also see Subh Ram and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2010)1 SCC 444).
20. Further it is also settled that when the purpose of acquisition is common and no developmental activity is re-
quired to be carried out for putting it for the said purpose, compensation is to be awarded at uniform rate. (see Viluben Jhalejar Contractor (dead) by Lrs vs. State of Gujarat (2005) 4 SCC 789, Himmat Singh and others vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another (2013) 16 SCC 392, Peerappa Hanmantha Harijan (dead) by Legal Representatives and others vs. State of Karnataka and another (2015) 10 SCC 469.) ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30
21. Law with respect to allowing or disallowing the de-
.
duction on account of development charges is also no longer res-integra and stands settled by the Apex Court in Hemant Singh's case supra and Union of India and others Vs. N.S.Rath-
nam and sons (2015) 10 SCC 681, wherein it has been held that when for using the land to the purpose for which it is ac-
quired, no developmental activity is undertaken by the bene-
ficiary, no question of expenditure for development thereon would arise and therefore, in such case, deduction by way of development charges is unpermissible as where there is no developmental activity there is no reason to deduct develop-
ment charges.
22. Out of six sale deeds Ext. R-1 to Ext. R-6, Ext. R-3 is dated 12.10.2007, which is beyond the period of twelve months from date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act and thus is not proximate in time as per adopted practice for determination of value of land. Otherwise also, value of land on the basis of sale deed becomes at the rate of Rs. 26.04 per square meters, which is less than the value determined by the Land Acquisition Collector. Similarly, ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 value of land on the basis of other sale deeds become at the .
Rs. 35.15, Rs.36.10, Rs.197.96, Rs.261.19 and Rs.26.99 per square meter, respectively, the average whereof becomes at the rate of Rs.111.46 per square meter. Highest value in these sale deeds is Rs.261.19 per square meter which again less than that value determined by the Land Ac-
quisition Collector. Value of land on the basis of these sale deeds either singly or collectively after calculating average value becomes to be lesser value determined by the Land Acquisition Collector and award of compensation on the ba-
sis of which is impermissible under Section 25 of the Act, hence these sale deeds have been rightly ignored by the Reference Court.
23. As discussed supra, in absence of availability of exemplar sale deeds pertaining to the village, land whereof is under acquisition, exemplar sale deeds of adjoining vil-
lages can be taken into consideration. The principle also ap-
plies equally to the award(s), pertaining to adjoining village(s), passed during acquisition of land in these ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 village(s) and such award(s) can also be taken into .
consideration for determining the value of land under acquisition in adjacent village either for awarding identical compensation if nature and potentiality of lands of both villages is similar or after making appro-
priate deductions in cases, where similarity of nature and potentiality of lands in both villages is not estab-
lished.
24. PW-2 Satpal, in his examination-in-chief submitted by way of affidavit has deposed that village Athwan is a part of economic zone, Una surrounded by Amb Industrial Area in the East, Gagret Industrial area in the West, villages Kalroohi and Mubarakpur in the North and village Adarsh Nagar, Amb in the South and is situated on National Highway Amb to Hashiarpur and all government offices/institutions of Sub Di-
vision Amb are near the land of this village under acquisi-
tion. In cross-examination, he has stated that his house is situated in village Kalroohi and village Adhwan is also a part of village Kalroohi.
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 3025. PW-3 Rameshwar Dutt in his examination-in-chief .
has corroborated the statement of PW-2 Satpal with further clarification that acquired land is situated in between the vil-
lages Adarsh Nagar Amb and Kalroohi and on account of lo-
cation and quality, this land was the best land in the area.
The fact stated by PW-2 Satpal and PW-3 Rameshwar Dutt, with regard to location of the land in question as well as the best quality of the same in comparison to other lands in sur-
roundings, has not been questioned in cross-examination.
From the oral evidence on record, it is apparent that the land under acquisition of village Athwan is located in between Adarsh Nagar Amb and Kalroohi. Village Athwan is also hav-
ing the identical facilities of electricity, water like Adarsh Na-
gar Amb and Village Kalroohi and also that the said land was having the potential of development as industrial/residential/commercial area, as the same is sur-
rounded by industries on three sides. Further, the land is also situated near the National Highway like the land of vil-
lages Kalroohi and Adarsh Nagar. Not only this, the Land Ac-
quisition Collector, at the time of acquisition of the land of ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 village Kalroohi, has rated the value of land of village Athwan .
and Kalroohi almost of the similar value. The said fact is evi-
dent on comparison of rate determined by LAC in present case as reproduced in para 2 with the value of land of village Kalroohi determined by him, which is reproduced in award Ext. P-25, which reads as under:-
Sr.No. Class of land Rate per sq. m. Rate per Sq.m.
within radius of beyond 40 m
r 40 m of N.H. of N.H.
i) Kuhli Abbal/ 575/-(Athwan) 450/- (Athwan)
Gair Mumkin
Abadi. 600/- 450/-
(Kalroohi) (Kalroohi)
ii) Barani Abbal 560/-(Athwan) 450/-(Athwan)
550/- (Kalroohi) 450/- (Kalroohi)
iii) Banjar Kadeem/ 400/-(Athwan) 300/-(Athwan)
other Gair Mumkin 400/- (Kalroohi) 300/- (Kalroohi)
26. From the above comparison, it is evident that for Kuhli Abbal Gairmumkin Abadi situated within the radius of 40 meters of National Highway and for the land situated be-
yond 40 meters of National Highway, value of land in village Kalroohi has been determined at the rate of Rs. 600/- and Rs.450/-, whereas for village Athwan, it has been valued at the rate of Rs. 575/- and Rs. 450/-, for Barani Abbal, the ::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30 rates are Rs. 550/- and Rs. 450/- in village Kalroohi and Rs.
.
560 and Rs. 450/- in village Athwan has been assessed. Sim-
ilarly, Banjar Kadeem and other Gair Mumkin land has been assessed having the value at Rs. 400/- and Rs. 300/- in both the villages. Therefore, Land Acquisition Collector himself considered the value of nature and potentiality of land of both the villages on equal footings. Therefore, plea of North-
ern Railway that there is no evidence on record for equating nature and potentiality of land of these two villages, is not sustainable. As there is ample evidence of similarity of na-
ture and potentiality, the award passed in related acquisition in village Kalroohi can be taken into consideration for award-
ing identical rate for acquisition of land in village Athwan.
27. Though, there is also evidence of location of land at Village Adharsh Nagar Amb adjoining to village Adhwan, but there is weak evidence of similarity of nature and poten-
tiality of that land with land of village Athwan. Therefore, award Ext.P-24 cannot be strictly relied upon for awarding the identical compensation of land in village Athwan. Pe-
rusal of the impugned award passed by the learned Refer-
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30ence Court also indicates that this award Ext. P-24 pertaining .
to village Adarsh Nagar, Amb has not been taken into consid-
eration by the Reference Court for enhancing the value of land under consideration. The Reference Court has only re-
lied upon the award Ext. P-25, pertaining to village Kalroohi.
28. For the discussion made hereinabove, no illegal-
ity, irregularity or perversity is found committed by the Ref-
erence Court by relying upon the award Ext.P-25 for deter-
mining the value of acquired land at the rate of RHemant Singh's case supra and Union of India and others Vs. N.S.Rath-
nam and sons (2015) 10 SCC 681, s. 1,000/- per square meter.
I find no ground for interference, particularly when the said award Ext.P-25 has also been affirmed by this Court vide judgment dated 26.07.2018, passed in RFA No. 388/2016 alongwith connected matters.
29. So far as the valuation of the building/structure standing on the land under acquisition is concerned, no evi-
dence to rebut the same has been led by the Northern Rail-
ways before the Reference Court. In cross-examination of PW-1 Anil Kumar and PW-4 Neeraj Kumar also nothing sub-
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP 30stantial has been brought on record to discredit the valua-
.
tion of building/structure proved by these witnesses. Rather it has come in their cross-examination that the scheduled rate of Public Works Department was followed for valuation and nothing has been put to these witnesses or placed on record to establish that valuation carried out by them was not inconsonance with the scheduled rate of PWD or exces-
sive in nature. Therefore, no interference on this issue also, is warranted.
30. Therefore, land owners/claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation on the basis of value of land at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per square meters alongwith statutory benefits and also compensation for structures/houses as de-
termined by the Reference Court.
31. Accordingly, the impugned award is upheld and all appeals are dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.
32. Record be sent back.
1st November, 2018 (Vivek Singh Thakur)
(hemlata/tm) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 06/11/2018 22:56:16 :::HCHP