Back
1999 Supreme(P&H) 526
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Swatanter Kumar, J.
State Of Haryana
Versus
Meena Dua And Ors.
Regular First Appeal No. 4294 of 1998,1160 of 1998,
Decided On : MAY 27, 1999
In determining the fair market value of acquired land, the Court should consider relevant and admissible evidence, such as sale instances proved by the vendor and vendee or by revenue authorities, and take into account the location, potential, and development charges of the land.
Headnote:
LAND ACQUISITION - COMPENSATION - DETERMINATION - SALE INSTANCES - RELEVANCE - DEDUCTION FOR DEVELOPMENT CHARGES - PRINCIPLES.
Fact of the Case:
The State of Haryana acquired 141.08 acres of land in villages Ankhir and Fatehpur Chandela for residential and commercial purposes. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 3.50 lacs per acre with 30% solatium and other statutory benefits. Claimants were dissatisfied and sought reference to the District Judge under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The District Judge enhanced the compensation to Rs. 360/- per square yard with 30% solatium and other statutory benefits.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the sale instances tendered by the State were not admissible as they were neither proved by the vendor and vendee nor by revenue authorities. The Court also held that the brochures and letters of allotment produced by the claimants could not be taken into consideration as they reflected the rate of developed plots where the State had incurred heavy expenditure in mass development of the town. The Court relied on a judgment of the High Court in a similar case, where compensation was awarded at the rate of Rs. 337.20 per square yard for land acquired in 1987. The Court applied a deduction of 20% for development charges, resulting in a net value payable to the claimants of Rs. 281.76 per square yard.
Issues: 1. Whether the sale instances tendered by the State were admissible to determine the fair market value of the acquired land? 2. Whether the brochures and letters of allotment produced by the claimants could be taken into consideration to determine the fair market value of the acquired land? 3. What was the fair and reasonable market value of the acquired land at the time of notification?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The sale instances tendered by the State were not admissible as they were neither proved by the vendor and vendee nor by revenue authorities. Additionally, the value indicated in these sale instances was lower than the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector, making them irrelevant. 2. The brochures and letters of allotment produced by the claimants could not be taken into consideration as they reflected the rate of developed plots where the State had incurred heavy expenditure in mass development of the town. The Court held that the price of the acquired land was very low and that component alone could be looked into for determining the fair market value. 3. The fair and reasonable market value of the acquired land at the time of notification was Rs. 281.76 per square yard. This was determined by applying a deduction of 20% for development charges to the value of Rs. 352.20 per square yard, which was arrived at by considering the judgment of the High Court in a similar case and other relevant factors.
Final Decision: The Court partly allowed the appeals filed by the State and dismissed the appeals filed by the claimants for enhancement. The claimants were entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 281.76 per square yard with all statutory benefits under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2), and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Swatanter Kumar, J.
1. These two Regular First Appeals along with 235 Regular First Appeal Appeals arise from a common judgment of the learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad dated 15.12.1997. The learned Additional District Judge vide the impugned judgment answered 174 references which were referred to that Court by the Land Acquisition Collector under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act. The Court had enhanced the compensation payable to the claimants for acquisition of their respective lands to Rs. 360/- per square yard in addition to 30% solatium and other statutory benefits. The State of Haryana preferred 173 appeal assailing the impugned judgment on the ground that excessive compensation had been awarded to the claimants and they pray for restoration of the award of the Collector. On the other hand, claimants are assailing the same judgment and pray for enhancement of compensation.
2. In order to examine the merits of the respective contentions raised on behalf of the parties it will be useful to refer to the necessary facts. State of Haryana issued a notification No. LAC(F)NTLA/90/13 dated 11.5.1990, under Section 4 of the Act, intending to acquire 185-74 acres of land falling in the revenue estate of village Ankhir and 13.19 acres falling in the revenue estate of village Fatehpur Chandela. Because of a stay order passed by the High Court in Civil Writ Petitions No. 10152 of 1990, 4093 of 1992 and 2320 of 1994, certain lands were excluded from the acquisition and did not form part of the proceedings for acquisition before the learned Collector. The proceedings and the award related to acquisition of only 141.08 acres as that was the actual area. This land was acquired for a public purpose, namely development and utilisation of the land for residential and commercial purpose of Section 21-D, Faridabad.
3. The learned Land Acquisition Collector vide Award No. 2 dated 5.5.1993, upon following due process of law, awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 3.50 lacs per acre for the land in addition to 30% solatium and other statutory benefits admissible under the Act. The compensation was separately awarded for structures or construction found on the acquired land in addition to awarding such compensation for trees, fruit trees and plants etc. on the acquired land. As the claimants were not satisfied with the amount of compensation awarded to them by the learned Land Acquisition Collector, they requested for referring of their applications to the learned District Judge, Faridabad, in pursuance to the provisions of Section 18 of the Act. 174 references were made by the Land Acquisition Collector.
4. The learned Additional District Judge, as already noticed, vide his judgment dated 15.12.1997, granted the following compensation for acquisition of the land while giving the reasoning as stated hereunden-
"As such the average of Ex P.5, P.22, P.24 and P.38 comes to Rs. 366/- per square yard. From the statements of petitioners, namely Radhey Shyam PW-14 and Raju Dadwani PW.13 read with lay out plans Ex.P.15 to P.21, it is evident that the acquired land is surrounded by various residential sectors, N.I.T. Faridabad commercial establishments and Badkhal Tourism Complex. Keeping in view the location of the above land and the location and potential of the acquired land, I think it just to assess the market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 360/- per square yard.
5. Various claimants had raised claims in relation to structures, trees, fruit trees, plants etc. which were dealt with by the learned Additional District Judge separately and they had been awarded compensation in that regard.
6. No grievance was made by any of the learned counsel appearing for the claimants or for the State in relation to compensation awarded on account of super-structures, trees, fruit trees, plants etc. Thus, this Court is primarily concerned whether a compensation of Rs. 360/- per square yard aw
