IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment establishes that the Additional District Judge has equivalent jurisdiction to the Principal District Judge in land acquisition matters, and emphasizes the necessity of fair compensation reflective of market value.

JUDGMENT :

Mohd. Akram Chowdhary, J.

1. Through the medium of this judgment it is proposed to dispose of the above titled two appeals arising out of common judgment dated 17.01.2008 (hereinafter called 'impugned judgment for short) passed by the Court of Learned 2nd Additional District Judge Jammu (hereinafter called 'reference court' for short) in two references made by Collector Land Acquisition [Assistant Commissioner (G)], Jammu titled Dharmpaul & Ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner (G) & Anr. and Beli Ram & Ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner (G) & Anr.

2. Having been aggrieved of the common judgment passed in both the references under section 18 of Jammu and Kashmir Land Acquisition Act, both these appeals have been preferred by Defence Estate Officer Circle Jammu Cantt; Jammu, separately.

3. Defence Estate Officer Jammu Circle Jammu Cantt; (hereinafter called appellant) vide his No. JKJ/103/ACQ/DEO/181 dated 17.3.1989 forwarded an indent to the District Collector (Dy. Commissioner) Jammu to acquire 142 kanals of land comprising under Khasra Nos. 81, 84 min, 131 min, 132 min, 133, 134, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 178, 179 and 180 situated at village Narwal Pain Jammu proposed for defence purpose namely construction of residential-cum-office accommodation. The District Collector assigned these acquisition proceedings to Assistant Commissioner (G) (hereinafter referred as Collector for short) to proceed in the matter under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act Samvat 1990. The Collector proceeded in the matter after issuance of requisite notifications by the Collector and the Govt. The land in question was acquired by Final Award dated 09.04.1992 passed by the Collector granting compensation to the land owners at a uniform rate of Rs. 1.00 lac per kanal alongwith Jabrana (Solatium) @ 15%.

4. Aggrieved of the grant of compensation the land owners Dharampaul, Rameshwar Singh, Kewal Krishan, Smt. Yasmeen and Bahar Din made applications to the Collector whose Reference was made by the Collector vide his No. LH-121/68-II, dated 16.03.1994. Similarly land owners Beli Ram, Gudo and Kuki also applied for making reference and the Collector vide his No. LH/121/68, dated 19.12.1994 also made a reference to the District Court Jammu. In both the references the land owners were aggrieved of the rate of compensation and claimed that they should be paid compensation at least @ Rs. 3.00 lacs per kanal. They also took a plea that in the year 1991 under the chairmanship of Divisional Commissioner Jammu, a high level committee of officers had thrashed out of the matter with regard to determination of rate of land in the area having regard to the commercial value of an adjoining land decided the market value of land @ Rs. 2.75 lac per kanal. The references were received by the District Court on 28.03.1994. Vide order dated 28.8.1995 both the references were clubbed together by the Reference Court having regard to the same question of market value of the land acquired at the relevant time being same and the minutes of the proceedings were ordered to be recorded in the reference titled Dharam Paul vs. Collector Assistant Commissioner (G) Jammu. Respondent Collector filed objections, to both the references.

5. Based on the pleadings of the contested parties following issues were framed for trial of the References by the District Court Jammu:

i. Whether the amount of compensation awarded by the Collector for the acquired land is less than the market value of the land. If so, what was the market value of the land at the time of acquisition? OPP

ii. Relief. ?

6. After leading evidence by the land owners the intending officer-Defence Estate Officer Circle Jammu Cantt; (appellant herein) was impleaded as party respondent no. 2 by the District Court Jammu on 21.1.2006, on an application moved by the land owners. Mr. Prag Sharma, Advocate appeared on behalf of the Defence Estates Officer before the District Court on 17.03.2006 and sought adjournment for fi