Delhi District Court
Raminder Kaur vs . Union Of India on 14 May, 2012
LAC. No. 42/11/06
Raminder Kaur Vs. Union of India
IN THE COURT OF MS. MAMTA TAYAL, ADJ:
SOUTH WEST: NEW DELHI
LAC. No. 42/11/06
Village : Pochanpur
Award No. : 30/2002-2003
UID No: 02405C0343542009
In the matter of:-
Mrs. Raminder Kaur
W/o Shri Balwant Kaur
R/o J-186, Vikas Puri
New Delhi.
...Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India
Through Land Acquisition Collector
South-West District, Kapashera,
New Delhi
2. DDA
Through its Vice Chairman
Vikas Sadan, I.N.A Market
New Delhi
...Respondents
Filed on : 28.03.2006
Reserved on : 02.05.2012
Decided on : 14.05.2012
J U D G M E N T :-
1. This is a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
2. Vide notification No. F.10(30)/96/L & B/LA/13417 LAC No: 42/11/06 1 DOO 14.05.2012 LAC. No. 42/11/06 Raminder Kaur Vs. Union of India dated 13.12.2000 under Section 4 of LA Act and subsequent notification under Section 6 of LA Act dated 07.12.2001, 1517 bigha and 08 Biswa of land forming part of village Pochanpur was notified for acquisition for Planned Development of Delhi.
3. The Collector categorized the land in two blocks. In Block A, the land was leveled/ low lying upto the depth of 1 meter. In Block B such land was included from which 'top soil' had been excavated beyond 1 meter. Block B comprises of only 40 bighas and 7 biswa of land.
4. For determining the market value of the land with reference to the 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. 13.82 lacs per acre as conveyed by the Dy. Secretary ( L.A) Land Building department vide letter No. F-9 (20)/80/L & B / LA/ 8490 dated 11.09.2001. Therefore, market value of the land under acquisition was determined @ Rs. 13.82 lacs/- per acre in Block A and market value of land in Block B was fixed @ Rs. 12.32 lacs per acre .
5. Petitioner is bhumidar of land mentioned in statement under Section 19 of LA Act i.e. 21//9(1-0) full share in village Pochanpur as held vide judgment dated 20.09.2011 in title dispute bearing LAC No. 28/11/04. The possession of land in question was taken on 11.09.02. Aggrieved by market value of his land as determined by the collector, petitioner filed the present reference petition for enhancement of compensation.
6. Union of India and DDA filed their written LAC No: 42/11/06 2 DOO 14.05.2012 LAC. No. 42/11/06 Raminder Kaur Vs. Union of India statements opposing any enhancement of compensation.
7. On pleadings of parties, following issues were framed:-
(i) Whether DLR Act is applicable to the land in dispute, if so, to what effect? OPD
(ii) To what enhancement of compensation the petitioner is entitled to claim, if so what amount? OPP
(iii) Relief.
8. Five witnesses in all were examined on behalf of petitioner to establish his claim. PW1 is LDC, L & DO who proved the notification containing schedule of market rates as Ex. PW1/A. Kanungo, Land and Building Department, as PW2 proved the record of minimum price fixed by Delhi Administration for agricultural land in Delhi. Kanungo, LAC North West, as PW3 proved Award No. 5/2003-04 of village Mangolpur Khurd. PW4 Halka Patwari was summoned to prove Aksizra of village Pochanpur and lastly Draftsman, Town Planning Department, as PW5 proved notification under Section 507 of DMC Act. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has tendered copy of the judgment dated 06.01.2012 of Hon'ble High Court passed in LA Appeal No. 111/2010, in support of case of petitioner.
9. On behalf of respondent Union of India, Shri J.R. Mathur, advocate from office of LAC tendered award as Ex. R1. RE was closed by UOI. No evidence has been adduced by DDA.
10. I have heard Ld. Counsel for both the parties at LAC No: 42/11/06 3 DOO 14.05.2012 LAC. No. 42/11/06 Raminder Kaur Vs. Union of India length, perused the entire records and carefully considered the matter.
11. So far as the market value of land in question is concerned, it is noted that the petitioner has himself relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble High Court delivered in LA Appeal No. 111/2010 titled as Sehaj Ram and Ors Vs. Union of India & Anr. Dated 06.01.2012. Vide said judgment the market value of land of village Pochanpur, acquired by same award, was held to be Rs. 16,50,000/- per acre for the Category 'A'. In the light of these settled facts, my findings on above issues are as follows:-
12. ISSUE NO. 1: In view of judgment passed in case of 'Sehaj Ram & Ors. Vs. Union of India and another' by Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, this issue is decided in favour of petitioner and against the respondents.
13. ISSUE NO. 2: As noticed herein above, the petitioner has relied upon the judgment delivered in the case of Sehaj Ram & Ors. ( Supra). No evidence showing that the land of petitioner is better than the land involved in the case of Sehaj Ram has been brought on record by the petitioner. Similarly no evidence showing that the land of petitioner is inferior in any aspect than the land referred to in case of Sehaj Ram has been adduced by the respondents. Therefore, in the present reference market value of land in question shall be the same as was determined by Hon'ble High Court for Block 'A' land as the land of petitioner in reference under Section 18 of LA Act has been reflected as Category A land.
LAC No: 42/11/06 4 DOO 14.05.2012 LAC. No. 42/11/06 Raminder Kaur Vs. Union of India
14. ISSUE NO. 3 : Relief -
In view of foregoing discussion, petitioner is held entitled to following reliefs:-
i. Petitioner is entitled to receive compensation @ Rs. 16,50,000/- per acre i.e. an increase of Rs. 2,68,000/- per acre.
ii. Petitioner is entitled to receive additional amount @ 12% per annum under Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
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 and @ 15% per annum for subsequent period till payment.
v. Petitioner is entitled to benefit of Sunder vs. Union of India: 93 (2001) DLT 153.
15. The reference is answered accordingly. Let a copy of the judgment be sent to the LAC(SW) for information and necessary action. Decree sheet be prepared in terms of judgment and file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court (MAMTA TAYAL)
on the day of 14th May 2012 ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE
DWARKA COURTS: NEW DELHI
LAC No: 42/11/06 5 DOO 14.05.2012