JUDGMENT :

HARKESH MANUJA, J. 

CM-3610-CI-2022

Present is an application moved on behalf of applicants/appellants for permission to lead additional evidence in the shape of following two sale deeds:-

2. Notice of the aforesaid application was issued to the respondents on 13.01.2023, however, till date, no reply has been filed.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book.

4. A perusal of the record shows that the present appeal pertains to acquisition of 5.15 acres of land situated within the revenue estate of Village Soonk. Although, three sale deeds Ex.P3 to Ex.P5 pertaining to the revenue estate of Village Soonk have been produced on record by the appellants/ landowners, however, they have sought permission to lead additional evidence in the form of aforementioned two sale deeds by placing on record duly attested certified copies thereof.

5. Taking into account the nature of the controversy involved in the present case, which requires adjudication about grant of just and fair compensation to the appellants/ landowners against compulsory acquisition of their land, the documents in the form of sale deeds i.e. annexures A-1 and A-2, which pertained to the period pre-notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’, in the case in hand, shall help this Court to adjudicate the matter in a more effective manner.

6. More than that, the respondents have not filed any reply to the prayer made on behalf of the appellants/ landowners so as to raise any kind of doubt or dispute about the genuineness of sale transactions in the form of Annexures A-1 and A-2.

7. In such circumstances, taking the aid of Section 51-A of the Act, both the sale deeds are taken on record being part of evidence as Ex.A1 and Ex.A2.

8. Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

MAIN CASE:

By way of filing the present appeal challenge has been laid to the Award dated 29.08.2012, passed by the learned Reference Court-cum-Additional District Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali (hereinafter referred to as ‘Reference Court’).

2. Briefly stating, some land, situated within the revenue estate of Village Soonk, was acquired by the Government of Punjab vide notifications dated 17.05.2002 and 29/31.05.2002, issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the Act’ respectively, for public purpose i.e. for “construction of residential colony area of Jainty Dam in Village Soonk”. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘the LAC’) vide award dated 06.06.2005 assessed market value in respect of the acquired land @ Rs.1,20,000/- per acre for Barani, Abadi land and Rs.35,000/- per acre for Gair Mumkin Pahar, along with all other statutory benefits under the Act.

3. Dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellants/ landowners filed reference petition invoking Section 18 of the Act, which came to be disposed of by the learned Reference Court vide decision dated 29.08.2012 while determining the market value of the acquired land at a uniform rate of Rs.5,49,897/- per acre besides all other statutory benefits under the Act.

4. Aggrieved of the Award passed by the learned Reference Court, the present appeal was preferred at the instance of appellants/landowners.

5. Impugning the aforementioned Award, learned counsel for the appellants/ landowners submits that the learned Reference rd Court went wrong having applied deduction of 1/3 over the sale price per acre derived from sale instances Ex.P3 and Ex.P4. Learned counsel contends that though an appreciation of 12% per annum on cumulative basis was applied over the base price per acre derived from Ex.P3 and Ex.P4, however, in the given facts, where the total land acquired was merely 5.15 acres and the sale deeds Exs. P3 & P4 were ranging between 5 to 6 kanal of land pertaining to the same revenue estate