Ashwani Kumar Vs State of Hp

( 2026:HHC:14480 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA

RFA No.241 of 2015 Reserved on: 01.04.2026 Date of decision: 05.05.2026

_____________________________________________________ Ashwani Kumar ....Appellant Versus State of HP and another …Respondents ____________________________________________________ Coram_

¶5

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge

¶6

1 Whether approved for reporting?

¶7

For the appellant:	Mr. Bhupinder Singh Kanwar, Advocate.
For the respondents:	Mr. B.N. Sharma, Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Mr. Raj Kumar Negi, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ankush Thakur, Mr. Balwinder Singh
	Ballu and Ms. Archana Negi, Deputy Advocates General.

¶8

Sushil Kukreja, Judge

¶9

The instant appeal has been preferred under Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, ‘the Act’) by the appellant, who was petitioner before the learned Reference Court and hereinafter is referred to as “the appellant”) against the award dated 31.03.2015, passed by the learned District Judge, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh (for short ‘the Reference Court’).

¶10

1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶11

2 ( 2026:HHC:14480 )

¶12

Briefly sated the facts of the case are that the land of petitioner was acquired by the respondents for construction of Shimla Bye-pass Road and in this regard, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 24.10.1997, which was given wide publicity as per mandate of the Act. After complying with all codal formalities of Sections 6 and 7 of the Act, the Land Acquisition Collector passed Award No.29 of 2000 on 03.10.2000. As per the petitioner, the Land Acquisition Collector had not assessed the value of the acquired land properly, prevailing at the time of issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the Act, as the acquired land was situated on National Highway (NH) and was also suitable for commercial as well as residential purposes.

¶13

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said award, the petitioner preferred a reference petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, with a prayer that the market value of the acquired land be assessed at the rate of Rs.20 lacs per bigha alongwith other statutory benefits and the matter be referred to the learned District Judge, Shimla, HP for enhancement of the amount of compensation.

¶14

The learned Reference Court, vide the impugned award dated 31.03.2015, held the petitioner entitled for compensation of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.49,304/- per bigha, alongwith solatium and interest on the enhanced amount of compensation. Again, feeling

¶15

3 ( 2026:HHC:14480 )

¶16

aggrieved/dissatisfied with the impugned award, the appellantpetitioner preferred the instant appeal, with the prayer that the impugned award dated 31.03.2025 may be modified by enhancing the amount of compensation at the rate of Rs.2,50,000/- for the acquired land.

¶17

I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Additional Advocate General for the respondents-State and have also carefully gone through the records.

¶18

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the learned Reference Court has failed to appreciate the proximity of the acquired land with the National Highway Bye-pass and its nearness to the town, resulting in miscarriage of justice. He further contended that the acquired land was situated in the heart of Shimla town, having all the modern amenities.

¶19

In order to prove the market value of the acquired land, the petitioner has produced the copies of the sale deeds Ext.PW-3/A & Ext.PW-4/A. The description of the sale deeds, which have been relied

¶20

as exemplar sale deeds are as under:-

¶21

Sr. No.	Exhibit	Village	Land	_Sale consideration _	Date of sale deed
1.	Ext.PW3/A	Sangti	4 biswa	Rs.1,00,000/-	29.06.97
2.	Ext.PW4/A	Sehnan	0-59-45 hectors	Rs.26,12,000/-	11.09.08

¶22

4 ( 2026:HHC:14480 )

¶23

During the pendency of the present appeal, the appellant

¶24

filed an application (CMP No.406 of 2020) under Order 41, Rule 27, read with Section 151 CPC, for placing on record the copy of ‘ Khakha Dasti’ of Patwar Circle, Sanjauli. The said application was allowed on 17.12.2021 and the appellant was permitted to appear in the Court and tender the document in evidence. Thereafter, in support of the case of the petitioner, Patwari of Patwar Circle, Sanjauli, appeared in the witness-box as AW-1 on 04.03.2022 and produced on record Khaka Dasti of villages falling in Patwar Circle Sanjauli (Rural) as Ext. P-1. This witness has deposed that earlier there was only one village Shanan and after settlement, it has been bifurcated into two villages, known as Shanan-I and Shanan-II.

¶25

In the instant case, notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 24.10.1997 whereas the sale deed Ext.PW-4/A, has been executed on 11.09.2008 Therefore, the same is not liable to be taken into consideration which has admittedly been executed after 11 years from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act.

¶26

Now, coming to the sale deed Ext. PW3/A, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the land pertaining to the sale deed Ext.PW3/A, is situated in village Sangti, whereas the acquired land is situated in Mauza Shanan and as per Khaka Dasti Ext. P-1, village Sangti is situated near to village Shanan. Therefore, the learned

¶27

5 ( 2026:HHC:14480 )

¶28

counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned Reference Court has erred in not taking into consideration the sale deed Ext. PW3/A to assess the market value of the land in question.

¶29

On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General contended that no evidence has been led by the petitioner to prove that the subject matter of the land of the sale-deed Ext. PW3/A possesses the same or similar value as that of the acquired land and in such a situation, the sale-deed Ext. PW3/A cannot be considered as exemplar sale-deed.

¶30

As observed earlier, this Court has allowed the application filed by the petitioner for additional evidence and thereafter the Patwari of Patwari Circle Sanjauli has appeared in the witness-box as AW-1 and adduced in evidence, the copy of ‘Khakha Dasti’ of Patwar Circle, Sanjauli. Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice, if the matter is remanded back to the learned Reference Court to decide the same afresh after taking into consideration the statement of AW-1 Jyoti, Patwari, Patwari Circle Sanjauli, recorded before this Court.

¶31

Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed and the impugned award dated 31.03.2015, passed by the learned District Judge, Shimla, in Land Reference No.29-S/4 of 2010 is set aside. The case is remanded back to the learned Reference Court to decide the same afresh in accordance with law after taking into consideration the

¶32

6 ( 2026:HHC:14480 )

¶33

evidence led the petitioner (appellant herein) before this Court, i.e. the statement of AW-1.

¶34

Needless to state that as notification in the instant case under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 24.10.1997, therefore, the learned Reference Court is directed to decide the reference petition on or before 31.10.2026 . Parties are directed to appear before the learned Reference Court on 01.06.2026 .

¶35

Learned Registrar (Judicial) shall ensure that the entire record be remitted to the learned Reference Court forthwith.

¶36

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms, so also pending application(s), if any.

¶37

(Sushil Kukreja) May 05, 2026 Judge (V.Himalvi)

Ashwani Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashwani Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Renukaji Dam Project and Another Vs Kalyan Singh and Others

NTPC Ltd. Vs Rama and Ors.

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Anita Devi W/o Late Sh. Anil Kumar

Rajender Kumar and Others Vs Gopal Beri

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Nirmala

Nitika Chauhan Vs Gopal Beri