Delhi District Court
Sh.Balraj Tyagi - Son vs Union Of India Through on 2 April, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV KUMAR:
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE : ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
LAC No.466A/08
UID 02404C0126612008
IN RE :
SH. JAGAT SINGH TYAGI (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS
1. SH.BALRAJ TYAGI - SON
2. SH.BAIJ NATH TYAGI - SON
3. SH.RAJESHWAR TYAGI - SON
4. SH.VIJAY KUMAR TYAGI - SON
5. SH.SATISH KUMAR TYAGI - SON
ALL R/O VPO HOLAMBI KALAN, DELHI
...... PETITIONER
Versus
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR,
NORTH WEST,
DELHI.
2. DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION THROUGH ITS MANAGING
DIRECTOR/CHAIRMAN, BOMBAY LIFE BUILDING,
CONNAUGHT PLACE, NEW DELHI
LAC No.466A/08 Page 1 of 15
........RESPONDENTS
Award No. 22/199798
Village HOLAMBI KALAN
Date of Award/ Date of
Announcement of Award 30.03.1998
Notification U/S 4 & 17(1) F.10(39)/96/L&B/LA
dt. 15.11.96
Notification U/s 6 F.10(39)/96/L&B/LA(II)
dt. 21.11.1996
Date of Receipt of Reference : 30.07.2008
Date of Arguments : 21.03.2011
Date of Decision: 02.04.2011
REFERENCE PETITION UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE
LAND ACQUISITION ACT 1894
J U D G M E N T
1. This reference under section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called as LA Act), was sent to the reference court by the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred as LAC). LAC No.466A/08 Page 2 of 15
2. A large tract of Land measuring 940bigha 6 biswa of village Holambi Kalan, Delhi, was acquired by the Govt. for "shifting of Industrial Unit from city area of Delhi/N. Delhi". Notification under Section 4 of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'LA Act') was issued on 15.11.1996. Declaration under Section 6 was made on 21.11.1996; Thereafter, Award bearing no. 22/1997 98 was announced by Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as LAC) on 30.03.1998. The LAC determined the market price of the acquired land as Rs.1,86,500/ per bigha for Block 'A' and Rs.1,61,500/ per bigha for Block 'C'.
3. The brief facts as stated in the reference are that petitioner was the owner/bhumidar of 1/5 share in land bearing khasra no.70/6/1, 70/5/1, 70/5/2, 66/16/1, 66/6/2, 66/25/1, 66/25/2, total measuring 16 Bighas 8 Biswas, situated within the Revenue Estate of Village Holambi Kalan, Delhi (the said land). The said land was acquired by Govt. and LAC has passed the award granting Rs.1,86,500/ per bigha as market value to the petitioner. Being dissatisfied to the said value he challanged the award by filing the reference u/s 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
LAC No.466A/08 Page 3 of 15
4. The petitioner has challenged the said award on the following grounds :
a) that LAC has given very low rate of market value though the land of the petitioner has got potential value as the land of the petitioner is surrounded by the biggest colony of Asia namely Rohini and the land was acquired for the commercial activities;
b) that LAC has not taken into consideration that land has been acquired for commercial activities such as for setting of freight complex, therefore, market value of the land should be fixed at the rate of Rs.5,000/ per sq. meter;
c) that his land is situated quite close to the residential area of Narela and DSIDC Complex due to which his land has more potential value;
d) that land of the petitioner is between two roads including a national highway i.e. GT Karnal Road, and Delhi Narela Road, therefore, it has great potentiality for residential and commercial purposes;
e) that palatial farm house has been constructed in the same LAC No.466A/08 Page 4 of 15 revenue estate in which land of the petitioner has been situated and it is an open secret that the cost of land of farm house is not less that Rs.5000 per sq. meter;
f) that land of the petitioner is fully developed and has all the modern facilities/necessities i.e. Telephone, electric connection, water supply, public schools and SSN College and most frequent service of DTC buses and other private transport ;
g) That the land of the petitioner is on the main pucca Narela Road and the Rohini Town is in vicinity of acquired land is not less than Rs.5000/ per sq. meter;
h) That LAC has failed to consider that Govt. of India, Ministry of Urban Development has issue circular charging rate of colony under control of DDA for the year 1999 @ Rs.10,000 per sq. meter.
5. The petitioner has demanded the compensation of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.5,000/ per sq. yards.
6. The reference petition was contested by Union of India (hereinafter LAC No.466A/08 Page 5 of 15 referred to as 'UOI') as well as Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "DDA").
7. Both the respondents have filed their written statement, in which they had taken many objections to the claim filed by the petitioners. In its written statement filed on behalf of respondent no. 1/UOI it is stated that land of petitioner was not surrounded by developed or under developed colonies and can only be used for agricultural purpose and Delhi Land Reform Act was applicable to the said land. It is further stated that compensation awarded by LAC is fair, reasonable and adequate on the basis of market rate and petitioner is not entitle to any enhancement in the compensation awarded by the LAC.
8. In WS of Respondent no. 2/DDA, it is denied that land of the petitioner is adjacent to the developed area. It was further denied that at the time of notification u/s 4 market value of the land in the area was Rs.5,000/ per sq. yards. It is further stated that LAC has awarded the just and adequate compensation after taking into consideration all the facts relevant for determining the compensation LAC No.466A/08 Page 6 of 15 and as such petitioner is not entitle to any enhancement in the compensation.
9. During the admissiondenial of documents, petitioner has admitted statement u/s 19 of Land Acquisition Act sent by LAC.
10. After the completion of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to any enhancement in compensation. If so, to what amount ?
2. Relief.
11. In support of his claim for enhancement of compensation, Ld. counsel for the petitioner has only tendered the judgment passed by Hon'ble High Court dated 27.04.2006 in LA Appeal 91/2005 titled as Gajraj Singh Vs. UOI & Ors. as P1.
12. On the other hand Ld. Counsel for the respondents have tendered the copy of the award as Ex. R1.
13. I have heard the arguments and gone through the record. After going LAC No.466A/08 Page 7 of 15 through the case file my issue wise finding are as under:
14. Findings of issue no. 1 14.1 Petitioner has contended that valuation of land determined by LAC is not reasonable as LAC has not adopted the correct method of valuation. However, petitioner has not examined any witness to support his case for enhancement in compensation, but Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment in case Gajraj Vs. UOI & Ors. (Supra) which was decided by Hon'ble High Court on 27.04.2006. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner argued that Gajraj Vs. UOI (Supra) pertained to the same village, same notifications and same award by which the land of the present petitioner is acquired. Hence, same market value of petitioner's land be determined on the basis of said judgment.
14.2 On perusal of said judgment, I found that the Hon'ble High Court in Gajraj Singh's case (supra) determined the fair market value of levelled/'A' category land of village Holambi Kalan acquired vide award no. 22/9798, as Rs. 9,76,121/ per LAC No.466A/08 Page 8 of 15 acre.
14.3 In Gajraj Singh's case (supra) the Hon'ble High Court observed that : "It can safely be stated that the land in question had the potential or had been developed into residential or industrial place. It had metalled roads and as such they would be entitled to some higher compensation than the one awarded by the collector."
Further, the Hon'ble High Court after taking into account judicial pronouncement in Union of India v. Amar Singh RFA 464/88 and other connected appeals, decided on 7.2.2003, Jai Lal (dead) through L.Rs Vs. UOI 94 (2001), DLT 429, Om Parkash (dead) by L.Rs and others Vs. UOI & Anr. 2004 VII AD (SC) 37, determining fair market value of land in village Bhorgarh, in the vicinity of LAC No.466A/08 Page 9 of 15 village Holambi Kalan, observed that : ".......The High Court had granted compensation @ Rs.82,255/ per bigha . Still another notification was issued for acquisition of land in village Bhogarh for acquiring a land measuring about 52 acres for construction of godowns for Food Corporation of India etc. in the village Bhorgarh and the other two villages and the Supreme Court approved the grant of compensation to the claimants @ Rs.82,255/ per bigha. As in 1979 as well as in 198283......." ........It is clear from the various judgments which are judicial precedents in relation to the land situated in the revenue estate of Bhorgarh adjacent to the acquired land that the same had received compensation of Rs. 82,255/ per bigha for acquisition of the land in the year 1982, then by any standards, the present claimants are certainly entitled to enhancement at least of some compensation for compulsive acquisition of their lands which were also LAC No.466A/08 Page 10 of 15 their livelihood. ..........."
Thus petitioners are entitled to some enhancement." The Hon'ble High Court further noted that though LAC gave benefit to the claimants by adding value of land @ 11.5% p.a., but has erred in not giving the benefit for the period 1.4.96 to 15.11.96 and observed as under : ".......... No benefit has been given to the claimants for the period from 1.4.96 to 15.11.96, the date of acquisition of their land. Seven to eight months is a material period for considering the benefit to be given on an immovable property in the case of compulsive acquisition. The reference court as well as the Collector have accepted that the claimants would be entitled to the advantage in increase of price of their lands @ 11.5% compounded annually as the original price under the old policy was fixed @ 4.65 lacs per acre w.e.f. 1.4.90 . While, it was raised to Rs.10 lacs per acre w.e.f 1.4.96. This LAC No.466A/08 Page 11 of 15 error is manifest in the impugned judgment and in the award of the Collector. The claimants have been given compensation @ Rs.8,95,200/ per acre while they should have given compensation at the rate computed as per the Collector's award even if maintained @ Rs.9,49,173/ per acre. In terms of the judgments of the High Court and as approved by the Supreme Court in Om Parkash's case (supra) and by the High Court in Jai Lal's case, the claimants would certainly be entitled to higher compensation than the one awarded by the reference court. Even if the land of village Hulambi Kalan is treated inferior to that of Bhorgarh, the claimants would be entitled to higher compensation making a deduction for better location and potential in comparison to the acquired land. In furherance to the judicial pronouncements relating to Bhogarh and with the above recorded benefit @ 12 % annually compounded, the claimants would be entitled to receive a sum of Rs.10,03364/ per acre. On the basis of EX.PW1/A if it is taken to be of some evidential value and the reasonable deduction is made on account of industrial development of the sheds in village Bhogarh @ 25% from the rate of 260 per sq.m. And giving some adjustments on account of sq.yds or sq.meters, the claimants would get nearly Rs.9,75,000/ per acre.
The fair market value of the acquired LAC No.466A/08 Page 12 of 15 land can reasonably be concluded at Rs.9,76,121/ per acre. ..........."
Because of lack of evidence by the claimants , we approve the agricultural yield, computation based on judicial pronouncements of adjacent village and after correcting an error which has crept in the judgment of the Collector and the reference court with reference to the ploicy given by the Government in relation to agreicultural land in case of acquisition i.e. Policy dated 1.4.97, the claimants are entitled to more or less the same compensation. Deducing the mean of the above three figures, the fair market value of the acquired land reasonably be concluded at Rs.9,76,121/ per acre. Thus, we would award the said amount of compensation to the land owners/claimants...,"
14.4 Since respondent has not led any evidence to prove that said judgment which pertain to the same notification u/s 4 and same village has been set aside, therefore, I do not find any ground to differ from it, thus determine the market value of the petitioner's land, which is of Category 'A' land @ Rs.9,76,121 per acre. Besides this petitioner shall also be entitle to 12% additional amount LAC No.466A/08 Page 13 of 15 u/s 23 (1) A and 30% solatium u/s 23(2) of LA Act and 9% interest for the first year and thereafter 15% interest on the enhanced compensation u/s 28 LA Act till the payment of the enhanced compensation. Issue no. 1 decided accordingly.
15. Issue no. 2 : Relief 15.1 In view of the findings on Issue no.1, the petitioners are entitled to the following reliefs:
i) Compensation @ Rs. 9,76,121 per acre for the lands failing in category 'A' ;
ii) additional amount u/s 23 (1A) @ 12% p.a., on the market value from the date of notification u/s 4 of the LA Act till the date of award or dispossession, whichever is earlier ;
iii)solatium u/s 23(2) of LA Act @ 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation ;
iv)interest under Section 28 of L.A Act at the rate of 9% per annum for the first year and thereafter at the rate of 15% per LAC No.466A/08 Page 14 of 15 annum on the difference between the enhanced compensation awarded by this court and the compensation awarded by the LAC ;
15.2 Reference is disposed of accordingly. 15.3 Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. A copy of the judgment be sent to LAC for necessary action.
15.4 File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (SANJEEV KUMAR) today on 02.04.2011 ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE01:
DELHI LAC No.466A/08 Page 15 of 15