Back
2016 Supreme(HP) 2739
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
SANJAY KAROL, J.
State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others - Appellant
Versus
Dave Ram And Others - Respondent
RFA Nos. 73, 74 and 89 of 2009
Decided on : 30-03-2016
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shrawan Dogra, Advocate General, R.S. Verma, Addl. Advocate General, Ram Murti Bisht and Puneet Rajta, Dy. A.Gs.
For the Respondent:Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Advocate
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for fair and reasonable compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the principles governing the determination of market value of acquired land for public purpose.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition - Market Value - Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4, Section 18, Section 23, Section 34 - The judgment discusses the determination of market value of acquired land for public purpose, the admissibility of exemplar sale deeds as evidence, and the principles governing compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Key legal provisions include Section 23 on compensation, the principles of determining market value, and the requirement for fair and reasonable compensation.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves the challenge to a common award passed by the Addl. District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu, H.P., in a reference petition related to the acquisition of land for public purpose. The claimants sought compensation for the acquired land based on exemplar sale deeds as evidence of market value.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the claimants had established the real market value of the acquired land through clear and consistent evidence, and the Court below had correctly considered the exemplar sale deeds to determine the market value. The Court also discussed the principles governing compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and cited relevant case law to support its findings.
Issues: The issues involved the determination of market value of the acquired land, admissibility of exemplar sale deeds as evidence, and the principles governing compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the claimants' establishment of the real market value of the acquired land through clear and consistent evidence, the admissibility of exemplar sale deeds as evidence of market value, and the principles governing compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Final Decision: The appeals filed by the State were dismissed as devoid of merit, and the Court upheld the findings returned by the Court below.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Karol, J.
1. Common Award dated 17.11.2008, passed by Addl. District Judge, Fast Track Court, Kullu, H.P., in Reference Petition No. 11 of 2007, titled as S/Sh. Dave Ram & others v. Land Acquisition Collector (CZ) HPPWD, Mandi, & another, along with other connected reference petitions, stands assailed in these appeals filed by the State.
2. The challenge is laid on two grounds: (a) There is quantum increase in the value of the market price so determined by the Collector Land Acquisition, HP. PWD, Kullu, Himachal Pradesh; and (b) regardless of the category and classification of the land, amount stands uniformally assessed in favour of the claimants.
3. For public purpose namely Ramshilla - Bhekhali Road, proceedings for acquisition were initiated with the publication of notification dated 17.6.1998 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"). With the completion of the procedural formalities, the Collector Land Acquisition passed his Award dated 26.8.2000, determining the market value of the acquired land in the following manner:
4. Aggrieved thereof, various Land Reference Petitions so filed under the provisions of Section 18 of the Act came to be decided in terms of common impugned award dated 17.11.2008 in the following terms:--
"In view of issue-wise discussion and decision, reference petitions are allowed. Petitioners are entitled for the claim of compensation @ Rs. 3,80,000/- per bigha (Rs. 19,000/- per biswa).
33. Furthermore, petitioners are also entitled:
1. Solatium @ 30% under Section 23(2) of the Act on the compensation assessed under Section 23(1) of the Act;
2. Additional compensation under Section 23(1A) of the Act @ 12% per annum on the market value determined above from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Act, till date of award of collector;
3. Collector is also directed to pay interest @ 9% per annum on enhanced/excess amount of compensation under Section 23(1), additional compensation under Section 23(1A) and solatium under Section 23(2) of the Act from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act for one year and thereafter @ 15% per annum till the same is paid/deposited in the Court; and
4. petitioners shall also be entitled to interest under Section 34 of the Act from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act, if not paid."
5. In support of their claims, as is evident from the record, claimants tendered various exemplar sale deeds. However, only exemplar sale deeds (Ext. P-1, Ext. P-3 and Ext. P-5) were proved in accordance with law, for the vendors/vendees stood examined in Court.
6. While determining the market value of the land, in terms of the impugned Award, the Court below has taken into consideration exemplar sale deeds (Ext. P-1 and Ext. P-5). Exemplar sale deed (Ext. P-1) pertains to sale of 5 biswas of land which took place on 15.12.1997, a date prior to the initiation of the proceedings under the Act. Jindu Ram (PW-1) while stepping into the witness box, has proven contents of the said sale deed and further deposed that the entire consideration of Rs. 40,000/- for 5 biawas of land stood paid and with the registration of the sale deed, property mutated in his name. Significantly this exemplar sale deed forms part of the same revenue estate (Phatti Sari). But what is further significant is the unrebutted testimony of this witness to the effect that the land in question was of same nature, potential, utility and comparable with the exemplar sale land. The Public Prosecutor did not dispute such fact as is evident on record.
7. Exemplar sale deed (Ext. P-5) reveals one biswa of land to have been sold for Rs. 30,000/-. The sale deed is dated 14.10.1988. Tej Ram (PW-3) has proved the same. He further states that the exemplar sale land situated in Phati Banogi touches the boundary of Phati Sari and is similar in terms of location, quality and potentiality to that of the acquired land.
8. There is yet anothe
