SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(HP) 366

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Satyen Vaidya, J.
The Principal Secretary (PWD) To The Govt. Of H.P., Shimla - Appellants
Versus
Sh. Jai Gopal S/o Sh. Neel Kantha - Respondents
Regular First Appeal No. 307 Of 2012
Decided On : 29-08-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Sh. R.P. Singh, Deputy Advocate General.
For the Respondents:Anubhuti Sharma, Advocate.

Point of Law: The acquiring authority to award additional interest by way of damages @ 15% per annum from the date when respondents-claimants were dispossessed till the date of notification under Section 4 of Act.

Headnote:

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4, 6, 18 and 23 (2) - Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 – Land Acquired for public purpose - Notification – Compensation - Appellants have assailed the impugned Award on the grounds that assessment of the market value at Rs. 30,000/- per biswa is without any legal evidence. Reference Court had made a single sale transaction as basis for arriving at market value of acquired land whereby only two Biswas of land was sold for Rs.61,000/-. It is further submitted that allowance of compensation biswa without making any deductions in accordance with law is unsustainable - Court directed that additional interest at rate of 15% per annum on amount awarded by Land Acquisition Collector, shall be paid for period between the date of dispossession and date of Notification under Section 4(1) of Act. (Para 18)

Finding of the court: Land Acquisition Officer took possession of the land on the basis of a notification which did not survive. Respondent could not have continued to hold possession of land despite abatement of the proceeding under the 1984 Act. It was directed to be decided by the High Court upon a reference made by Collector in terms of Section 30 of the Act. The State, therefore, itself realized that its stand in regard to the ownership of 3 acres and 5 guntas of land was not correct. It, therefore, had to issue another notification having regard to the provisions contained in Act, 1984. Whereas the High Court may be correct in interpreting the question of law in view of the decision of this Court, but same would not mean that Appellants would not get anything for being remaining out of possession from 1979 to 1991.

Result: Appeal disposed of

JUDGMENT :

1. By way of instant appeal, Award dated 13.05.2011 passed by learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. in Reference Case No. 166 of 2003, whereby the compensation amount was enhanced at the rate of Rs.30,000/- per biswa, has been assailed by the appellant.

2. In 1962-63, 14 biswas 6 biswansi of land comprised in Khata/Khatauni No. 113/120 min Khasra No. 306, in mauza Kangu, Tehsil Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. owned by the respondents (hereinafter referred to as claimants) was utilized by the State for the construction of KanguDhar Link Road. Neither the land of the respondents was acquired nor any compensation was paid to them. However, the State Government decided to acquire the land of the claimants at much later stage and accordingly proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ‘Act’) were initiated. Notice under section 4 of the Act (for short, ‘section 4 notification’) was issued on 20.12.1995 and was published in ‘Rajpatra’ on 10.02.1996. Notice under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 12.04.1997. The Acquisition Collector (LAC) passed the Award on 19.9.1997. The market value of of the acquired land was assessed at Rs.26,536/-. The LAC had relied upon two transactions recorded vide mutation Nos. 340 and 353 dated 25.5.1995 and 05.02.1996 for arriving at the market value of the acquired land. Accordingly, a total amount of Rs.1,56,945/- was assessed as payable to the claimants. The breakup of which is as under:

1.

 

Value of land

Rs.26,536.00

2.

30%G.A. charges.

Rs. 7,961.00

3.

12% Addl. compensation U/s 23(1A) w.e.f.5.2.96 to 30.9.97

Rs. 5,261.00

4.

Interest U/s 34 w.e.f. 1.4.63 to 30.9.97

Rs.1,17,187.00

 

Total

Rs.1,56,945.00

3. On application of claimants under Section 18 of the Act, the LAC referred the matter to learned District Judge, Mandi, who further assigned the same to the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Mandi for disposal in accordance with law. The Reference Court passed the impugned Award whereby the market value of the acquired land was assessed at Rs.30,000/-per biswa and the respondents were held entitled to market value of Rs.30,000/-per biswa for the acquired land with 12% additional compensation under Section 23 (1A) of the Act from the date of publication of the Section 4 notification till the date of Award passed by the LAC, 30% solatium under Section 23 (2) of the Act and interest at the rate of 9% per annum for one year from the date of notification and thereafter @ 15% per annum till realization on the enhanced compensation amount.

4. Appellants have assailed the impugned Award on the grounds that the assessment of the market value at Rs. 30,000/- per biswa is without any legal evidence. The Reference Court had made a single sale transaction as basis for arriving at the market value of the acquired land whereby only two Biswas of land was sold for Rs.61,000/-. It is further submitted that the allowance of compensation at Rs.30,000/per biswa without making any deductions in accordance with law is unsustainable.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case carefully.

6. It is more than settled that the Reference Court does not sit in appeal over the Award passed by the LAC. The Reference Court has to independently adjudge the fair and just market value of the acquired land on the basis of material placed before it.

7. The claimants had examined as many as nine witnesses in order to prove the market value of the acquired land. Needless to say, that the market value relevant at the time of issuance of section 4 notification was to be taken into consideration. The claimants examined witness Mani Ram as PW4, who proved the sale deed Ex.PW4/ A whereby the land measuring one biswa three biswansi was sold for Rs.13,000/in the year 1989. Anot

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

          Please visit our Training & Support
          Center or Contact Us for assistance

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top