The main legal point established in the judgment is that the compensation for acquired land under the J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immoveable Property Act is based on its market value at the time of acquisition, considering its condition at the time of requisition, and taking into account its location, nature, and prevailing market conditions.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present appeals are directed against the award dated 27.03.2012 passed by the District Judge, Rajouri (hereinafter to be referred as the Arbitrator) in terms of J&K Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immoveable Property Act, 1968 (for short the Act), whereby the Indenting Department-Union of India through Defence Estates Officer, Northern Command has been directed to pay compensation to the land owners in respect of acquired land measuring 29 kanals and 8 marlas situated at Village Pathan Mohra, District Rajouri at the rate of Rs.69,000/- per kanal. While the Indenting Department-Union of India has challenged the impugned award by virtue of appeal bearing MA No. 456/2012 contending that the enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Arbitrator is not justified, the land owners have also challenged the impugned award through the medium of appeal bearing MA No. 179/2012 seeking enhancement of the compensation. Both these appeals are proposed to be decided in terms of the present judgment.

2. Before coming to the rival contentions raised by the appellants, it would be apt to briefly refer to the facts leading to filing of the present appeals.

3. On 31.05.1997, Government of Jammu and Kashmir issued notice under Section 7(i) of the Act asking the land owners/tenants/alottees of land measuring 210 kanals and 13 marlas situated in Village Pathan Morha, District Rajouri under various khasra numbers to show cause as to why the said land should not be acquired. It is pertinent to mention here that the land in question was already under the occupation of the Army and the rental compensation was being paid to the land owners in terms of the provisions of the Act as the same stood requisitioned vide order No. 274 dated 10.04.1952. Notification in Form-J was issued vide No. Home/CL-38/91 dated 24.02.1999 by the Principal Secretary to the Government, Home Department. Vide award dated 01.08.2000, the District Collector assessed the compensation of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per kanal and total compensation for entire chunk of the land was worked out to Rs.84,26,000/-.

4. Some of the land owners/appellants in MA No. 179/2012 raised a dispute about the quantum of compensation assessed in respect of the land measuring 29 kanals and 8 marlas comprised in khasra Nos. 53, 64 and 65. They received the compensation under protest and reserved their right to seek enhancement of compensation. Vide SRO 101 dated 06.04.2005 issued by the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, the dispute in terms of clause (b) of sub section (1) of Section 8 of the Act was referred to the Arbitration of the District Judge, Rajouri. It is in these circumstances that the proceedings relating to the arbitration were undertaken by the District Judge, who after receiving the written version of the land owners as well as the Indenting Department, vide his order dated 27.07.2007 framed the following issues :

1. What was the market value of per kanal of land of interested persons as at the time of its acquisition? OPP.

2. Whether the interested persons are entitled to claim for enhancement of compensation? O. P. Collector

3. Relief.

5. In order to prove their respective contentions, the parties were asked to lead evidence and accordingly the parties led their evidence before the learned Arbitrator. While the land owners examined PWs Trilok Raj, Subash Chander, Shakoor Khan, Meena Kumari and Patwari Sajjad Ahmed as witnesses in support of their case, the Indenting Department examined Sh. G.A. Khawaja, District Collector as witness in support of their case. Copies of a couple of sale deeds were also placed on record by the owners so as to justify the enhancement of compensation amount.

6. The learned Arbitrator after hearing the parties and after appreciating the material and the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the amount of compensation assessed in terms of the award passed by the Collector does not represent the market value of the