Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

RFA Nos. 1971 of 2001 and RFA No. 258 of 2002 have been taken as the main appeals for adjudication of all the abovesaid appeals.
The Haryana government vide notification No.LAC 2408-Agri- S(2)-93/3513 published in Haryana Government gazette (extraordinary) under Section 4 of the Act notified that land which is the subject matter of award No.3 dated November 16, 1994, was likely to be needed by the Government for the purpose of construction of new Fruit and Vegetable Complex at Kundli, situated in Village Rai, Had Bast No.69, Tehsil and District Sonepat. Thereafter vide notification No. 2209-Agri-S(2)- 94/35899, dated July 20, 1994 issued under Section 6 of the Act, the State declared that the land under acquisition measuring 310.05 acres vide award No.3 was needed for the public purpose of construction of new Fruit and Vegetable Complex. The Land Acquisition Collector, Faridabad was directed under Section 7 of the Act to take orders for acquisition of the land in question. The Land Acquisition Collector, Sonepat, vide award No.3 dated November 16, 1994 classified the land under acquisition as per Khasra Girdawari of Kharif 1993 as follows:-
8. Veterinary Hospital.

The site plan Ex.P-12 also reflects that besides there being commercial and industrial potential for the land acquired, the acquired land is in close vicinity of BDO office, bank buildings, Patwar Ghar, Dispensary, Police Station, Rai and Rest House, Rai. Ethnic Tourist Complex is bounded on one side by G.T. Road and on the other three sides by the land in dispute.

A Misc. application No.8625-CI of 2009 was filed to place on record a copy of the judgment dated May 30, 2007 passed in RFA No. 2453 of 2000-Smt.Chanderpati and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, in which the compensation pertaining to land acquired in Village Raipur, (Sonepat) for Development of Sectors 3 and 7 of the Sonepat vide notification dated November 9, 1992 under Section 4 of the Act was enhanced from `100 per sq. yards to ` 200 per sq. yards for Chahi land, by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Certified copy of the judgment in RFA No. 2453 of 2000 has been placed on record as annexure A-2. Annexure A-3 is the copy of the information supplied by the Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation under Right to Information Act, 2005, showing that the land of Village Rai was acquired for establishment of Industrial and Infrastructure Development and out of the acquired land, HSIIDC, Haryana, sold 25 acres of land to M/s Anant Raj Industries Ltd., 25 acres of land to M/s DLF Limited and 12 acres of land to M/s Reliance Industries Limited at the rate of ` 4000/- per sq. meters. The abovesaid statement has been produced on the record to show that the respondent is running business to earn the profit under the shadow of Land Acquisition Act. The farmers have got only ` 40 per sq. yards whereas the respondent had earned more. A copy of the site plan has been sought to be produced on record to show the situation of land of Village Raipur in which the compensation has been assessed at the rate of ` 200/- per sq. yards in RFA No. 2453 of 2000- Smt.Chanderpati and others Vs. State of Haryana and another and the situation of Village Rai, in which the subject matter of the dispute is situated.

The Advocate General, Haryana has objected to the reliance of annexures A-1, A-2 and A-3 as additional evidence but at the same time has not been able to rebut the argument of counsel for the appellants for the acquisition of Village Raipur which had taken place about 2 years prior to the present acquisition in Village Rai. The market value assessed at the rate of ` 200/- per sq. yards despite the fact that the land acquired in Village Raipur was only agriculture land. The site plan Annexure A-2 has been permitted to be taken on record as it clearly indicates the situation of Village Raipur and Village Rai shown in green and red colour. Village Raipur is also situated on the G.T. Road whereas Village Rai is also on the same side on the G.T. Road but towards Delhi. The Village Raipur is shown to be about 44-45 kms. from Delhi whereas Village Rai is shown about 38-39 kms. from Delhi. The distance between the two villages on the G.T. Road is 5/6 kms. The market value assessed by judicial orders pertaining to the land acquired adjacent to a particular land is always considered to be of important evidentiary value while determining the market value of a particular piece of acquired land. In order to determine the potentiality of acquired land, its surrounding and situation are taken into consideration besides considering the judgments passed by the Courts pertaining to the land adjacent to the acquired land. Village Bahalgarh is situated on the G.T. Road opposite to the land acquired at a distance of about 41 kms. from Delhi. 162.5 acres of land situated in Village Patti Musalmanan was notified under Section 4 of the Act for setting up a housing project in Sector 12, Sonepat, vide notification dated May 17, 1990, which was also followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act on May 16, 1991. In a reference under Section 18 of the Act, the Additional District Judge, Sonepat awarded compensation at the rate of ` 125/- per sq. yards as the land was situated behind E.C.E. Factory situated on the left side of the Sonepat-Bahalgarh road and ` 150/- per sq. yards on the right side abutting the G.T. Road. The High Court had enhanced the compensation from ` 125/- per sq. yards to ` 135/- per sq. yards for the land on the left side and from ` 150/- per sq. yards to ` 160/- per sq. yards on the right side on the ground that the land abutting the road had more potential value. The Apex Court in Udho Dass Vs. State of Haryana and others, C.A. No. 3677 of 2010 and Om Parkash Vs. State of Haryana and others, C.A. No. 3674 of 2010, decided on April 21, 2010 awarded a sum of ` 225/- per sq. yards as compensation for the entire acquired land alongwith all statutory benefits. The broad factors which had been taken into consideration by the Apex Court pertaining to the land which is situated on Sonepat- Delhi Road and the possibility of the acquired land being used for putting up buildings in the immediate or near future, would be sufficient to hold that the acquired land has got building potentiality and the same would be relevant to determine the market value in view of the increase in price attributable to such building potentiality. The relevant observations of the Apex Court pertaining to the land in Village Bahalgarh which is only at a distance of 3 kms. from the acquired land on the opposite side abutting to G.T. Road towards Panipat are as follows:-

"We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The location of the land in order to appreciate its potential for the purpose of compensation has first to be understood.. Admittedly, the land is situated within the municipal limits of Sonepat which is a district headquarter adjoining Delhi and within the National Capital Region. The distance between Bahalgarh, a small township on the Grand Trunk Road, National Highway No.1, built five centuries ago by Sher Shah Suri (and arguably India's most important and strategic highway and the lifeline between the rest of India and the north and northwest), and Sonepat is 7 km., as per the indication on the National Highway itself. The acquired land is situated on both sides of the road leading from Bahalgarh to Sonepat with some portions touching the road side and some portion slightly away and situated behind the ECE factory. It is, however, the admitted position and (we have seen the location on the maps that have been produced before us) that the land behind the ECE factory adjoins the area of village Jamalpur Kalan which had been acquired in the year 1992 and which the appellants claim should be made the basis for determining compensation in the present matter as well. It must also be noticed that the enormous development from the Delhi border alongside the Grand Trunk Road and well beyond the Bahalgarh - Sonepat bifurcation is now a matter for all to see and we have seen this on the maps produced in Court as well, as huge residential and commercial areas have been developed with a mind boggling increase in the price of agricultural land in the last 15 or 20 years. While dealing with the question of the potential value of the land acquired this Court in P. Rama Reddy and others Vs. Land Acquisition Officer, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority, Hyderabad and others (1995) 2 SCC 305 observed that several matters had to keep in mind; they being (and we quote), "(i) the situation of the acquired land vis-a-vis the city or the town or village which had been growing in size because of its commercial, industrial, educational, religious or any other kind of importance or because of its explosive population;