Delhi District Court
M/S Prashant Estates Pvt. Ltd vs Union Of India Through on 27 April, 2011
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV KUMAR:
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE : ROHINI COURTS : DELHI
LAC No. 278A/09
UID 02404C0168102009
IN RE :
M/S PRASHANT ESTATES PVT. LTD.
THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR SH. GIAN GUPTA
OFFICE AT 34/1, EAST PUNJABI BAGH,
NEW DELHI110026.
ALSO AT
M/S FORD SERVICE CENTRE
N.H8, NEAR SHIV MURTI, RANGPURI,
NEW DELHI110037.
...... PETITIONER
Versus
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH
LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR,
NORTH WEST,
DELHI.
2. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
VIKAS SADAN, DELHI (DDA)
........RESPONDENTS
Award No. 33/200304
Village HOLAMBI KALAN
Date of Award/ Date of
Announcement of Award 31.03.2004
LAC No. 278A/09 Page 1 of 11
Notification U/S 4 F.10(4)/97/L&B/LA/7329
dt. 22.08.2001
Corrigendum F.10(4)/97/L&B/LA/5148
dt. 26.06.2002
Notification U/s 6 F.10(4)/97/L&B/LA/7910
dt. 26.07.2002
Date of Receipt of Reference : 06.06.2009
Date of Arguments : 13.04.2011
Date of Decision: 27.04.2011
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).
2. A large tract of Land measuring 1094 bigha 17 biswa of village Holambi Kalan, Delhi, was acquired by the Govt. for "development of Freight Complex at Narela under planned Development of Delhi". Notification under Section 4 of The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'LA Act') was issued on 22.08.2001 and corrigendum was issued on 26.06.2002. Declaration under Section 6 LAC No. 278A/09 Page 2 of 11 was made on 26.07.2002; Thereafter, Award bearing no. 33/2003 04 was announced by Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as LAC) on 31.03.2004. The LAC determined the market price of the acquired land as Rs.15,70,000/ per acre.
3. The brief facts as stated in the reference are that petitioner was the owner/bhumidar of land bearing khasra no. 32/1(416), 32/2(202), 33/5(416), 33/4(416) measuring 16 bigha 10 biswa, 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.15,70,000/ per acre as market value to the petitioner. Being dissatisfied to the said value he challenged the award by filing the reference u/s 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
4. The petitioner has challenged the said award on the following grounds :
i) that LAC had not adopted the correct method of valuation; and determined the market value on the basis of policy of the Government of NCT, fixing indicative price of the agricultural land @ Rs.15,70 lac for the purposes of acquisition in the entire Delhi whereas price of land should have been assessed considering the situation and potentiality of land; LAC No. 278A/09 Page 3 of 11
ii) that LAC has failed to consider the present physical and existing development in and around the land of the petitioner;
iii) that LAC has failed to appreciate the marekt value of the land in question, farm houses, boundary wall, tubewell, fruit trees, plants etc.
5. The petitioner has claimed compensation of her land at the rate of Rs.30,000/ per sq. mtr. towrds value of the said land admeasuring 16 biswa 10 biswa. Besides this petitioner has claimed compensation of 50,00,000/ towards amounts incurred on construction of farm houses, tubewell, boundary wall etc. and Rs. 1,00,00,000/ for trees and plants.
6. The reference petition was contested by Union of India (hereinafter 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 LAC No. 278A/09 Page 4 of 11 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.10,000/ 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 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.
LAC No. 278A/09 Page 5 of 11
11. In support of his claim for enhancement of compensation, petitioner has only adopted the evidence led by petitioner in case titled as Ashok Kumar Vs. UOI LAC no. 199A/09.
12. On the other hand Ld. Counsel for the respondents have tendered the copy of the award as Ex. R1 and adopted the evidence led by respondents in case tiled Ashok Kumar Vs. UOI LAC No. 199A/09.
13. I have heard the arguments and gone through the record. After going 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, he has not lead any evidence to support his contention that how the LAC was wrong in fixing market value of land. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has adopted the evidence of Ashok Kumar Vs. UOI Vs. UOI LAC No.199A/09 which was decided by this court on 12.01.2011. 14.2 Ashok Kumar Vs. UOI (Supra) pertained to the same award, LAC No. 278A/09 Page 6 of 11 same village and same notification by which the land of the present petition is acquired. In the said case, I determine the market value @ Rs.16,43,811/ per acre. In that case I have observed in para 19 which is reproduced as under:
19. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has also contended that LAC has determined the market value on the basis of govt.
policy of fixing minimum rate of agriculture land dt. 09.08.2001. In the said policy minimum rate was fixed @ Rs.15,70,000/ which made effective from 01.04.2001, where as notification u/s 4 was issued on 22.08.2001 but the LAC has not granted any compensation for the price rise for the intervening period 01.04.2001 to 22.08.2001 Ld. Counsel has contended that 12% increase should be given for the intervening period.
19.1 On the other hand Ld. Counsel for the respondent has contended that since Rs.15,70,000/ is determined by the LAC is fair compensation therefore, petitioner is not entitle to any enhancement.
19.2 On going through the award, in para 2nd of page 22 LAC has mentioned that LAC No. 278A/09 Page 7 of 11 "In a policy announcement which came into effect from the financial year 20012002, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi fixed the indicative prices of agricultural land @ Rs.15,70,000.00 per acre for the acquisition of agricultural land vide their order No. F.9(20)/80/L&B/LA6696 dated 09.08.2001 which are applicable with effect from 01.04.2001. The notification under section 4 was issued on 22.08.2001 and the price of the land is to be determined as on the date of notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act itself. Hence, in view of the above facts I find Rs.15,70,000.00 per acre to be the most reasonable price for the agricultural land as on 22.08.2001. I accordingly, determine the market value of the agricultural land @ Rs.15,70,000.00 per acre."
Thus from the perusal of award it is apparent that minimum rates of agricultural land made applicable from 01.04.2001, whereas in case notification u/s 4 was issued on 22.08.2001. I found force in the contention of Ld. Counsel for the petitioner that atleast petitioner is entitle to escalation for the intervening period i.e. from the date when the Government policy become effective till the date of notification u/s 4 of the LA Act i.e. 01.04.2001 to 22.08.2001. There are numerous judgment which fortify LAC No. 278A/09 Page 8 of 11 my this view, in Mahinder Singh Vs. UOI Hon'ble High Court has awarded 11.5% compound interest for the intervening period between two notification where as in recently in Partap Singh Vs. UOI LA Appeal no. 780/2008 dated 19.12.2008 Hon'ble High Court has granted 12% increase for the intervening period between two sale deed since gap was about 10 months approx. Similarly in Bedi Ram & Ors. Vs. UOI and Ors. 93(2001) DLT 150, 12% increase has been given by the High Court. Considering all these judgment I am of the view that it would be justified to give increase @ 12% for the intervening period between the date of government policy & notification u/s 4 of LA Act (i.e. 01.04.2001 to 22.08.2001 = 143 days) it comes to Rs.16,43,811/ per acre. Thus petitioner get an enhancement of Rs.73,811 per acre
15. Since both the parties have relied upon the evidence led in case titled as Ashok KumarVs. UOI (supra), I find no justification to differ from the said judgment. Hence, I determine the market value @ Rs.16,43,811/ per acre. Thus giving an enhancement of Rs.73,811 per acre.
LAC No. 278A/09 Page 9 of 11
16. I summarise the issue no. 1 as follows:
a) that petitioner shall be entitle to market value at the rate of its Rs.16,43,811/ thus getting an enhancement of Rs.73,811/ per acre;
b) that petitioner shall not entitle to any interest for the period when the service was effected on the petitioner i.e. 25.09.2006 till the date of filing of application i.e.09.10.09;
Issue no. 1 decided accordingly.
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.
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) enhancement in compensation from Rs.15,70,000 per acre to Rs.16,43,811 per acre i.e. enhancement @ Rs.73,811/ per LAC No. 278A/09 Page 10 of 11 acre for the land as per statement u/s 19 LA Act ;
b) that petitioner shall not entitle to any interest for the period when the service was effected on the petitioner i.e. 25.09.2006 till the date of filing of application i.e.09.10.09;
c) 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 ;
d) solatium u/s 23(2) of LA Act @ 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation ;
e) 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 ;
18.2 Reference is disposed of accordingly. Decree sheet be prepared accordingly. A copy of the judgment be sent to LAC for necessary action. File be consigned to record room. Announced in the open court (SANJEEV KUMAR) today on 25.04.2011 ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE01:
DELHI LAC No. 278A/09 Page 11 of 11