The High Court enhanced compensation awarded for acquired land from Rs. 15 per square yard to Rs. 39 per square yard, aligning the rate with a judicial precedent for nearby land acquisition of similar potential and timeframe.
Compensation enhanced to Rs. 39 per square yard with entitlement to all statutory benefits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
R. F. A No. 2527 of 1987
1
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
R. F. A No. 2527 of 1987 (O&M)
Date of decision : 6.11.2008
Jagdish Chander and others ..... Appellants vs Shri Hardial Singh Sidhu and another ..... Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. O. P. Goyal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Priya Khurana, Advocate, for the appellants.
None for the respondents.
Rajesh Bindal J.
The landowners are in appeal before this court against the award of the learned court below passed in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the State of Punjab vide notification dated 25.4.1979 issued under Section 4 of the Act, acquired 22 kanals 17 marlas land situated in revenue estate of Barewal Awanq for providing Dairy Complex at Ludhiana. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated 11.9.1981 assessed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 50,000/- per acre. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 6.10.1986, determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 15/- per square yard i.e Rs. 72,600/- per acre.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the learned court below has not assessed the fair market value of the acquired land which was situated within the Municipal limits of Ludhiana, a fast developing industrial city. In fact, the acquired land which is a small piece of land measuring 22 kanals 17 marlas was situated adjoining to the existing Developed Dairy Complex. Meaning thereby that it had great potential value for residential and commercial purpose. The civic amenities were already present there. He further submitted that the learned court below has totally ignored the sale-deeds produced by the appellants on record besides
R. F. A No. 2527 of 1987
2
the award for acquisition of land pertaining to 256 Acres Scheme by the Ludhiana Improvement Trust, whereby acquisition was made vide notification dated 8.8.1976. The land pertaining to this acquisition by the Ludhiana Improvement Trust is situated just close to the land of the appellants. The only difference is that one boundary of that land is abutting Rajpura-Ferozepur Road. As far as the acquisition of 256 Acres Scheme is concerned, this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 4890 of 1986 Prem Gupta vs The Improvement Trust, Ludhiana , decided on 16.5.2006, determined the market value thereof at Rs. 39/- per square yard for the entire chunk of land. The submission is that even if other evidence produced on record by the parties is not considered, there is judicial precedent available whereby value of the land situated in the vicinity, which was acquired nearly 3 years prior to the present acquisition, the same deserves to be considered even giving further benefit for the period after which the present land was acquired. He further referred to various sale-deeds produced by the appellants on record whereby plots of land in the colonies developed in the vicinity of the acquired land were sold for the sale consideration ranging from Rs. 49/- to Rs. 85/- per square yard. His submission is that keeping in view the fact that this acquired land is not a very big chunk and the area in the vicinity having already been developed, the appellants are entitled to much more compensation as has been assessed by the court below.
Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record.
As far as the location and potential value of the land is concerned, the same is not in dispute as has been noticed by the learned court below in the impugned award. The land is within the municipal limits of fast growing industrial town, Ludhiana. Already developed Dairy Complex is in the vicinity, with civic amenities. The acquired land is also not a very big chunk being only 22 kanals 17 marlas. A perusal of the site plans, Ex. P-2 and R-1 shows that the land in dispute in the present case and the land forming part of 256 Acres Scheme are situated quite close to each other. The only difference is that one end of the land of 256 Acres Scheme is abutting the main Ferozpur-Rajpura road. For the acquisition of land of 256 Acres Scheme, this court in Prem Gupta 's case (supra), determined the market value thereof at Rs. 39/- per square yard. The
R. F. A No. 2527 of 1987
3
acquisition in the present case was made by notification dated 25.4.1979 whereas the acquisition of land of 256 Acres Scheme was made on 8.8.1976. Keeping in view these facts and that the land in both the acquisitions is quite close to each other, also the fact that the acquisition in the present case is for a small piece of land measuring 22 kanals 17 marlas of land, and setting of the advantage of some portion of land of 256 Acres Scheme being on the main road with the time gap in the notifications, in my view, the judicial precedent in Prem Gupta's case (supra), is squarely applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Accordingly, the value of the acquired land is determined at Rs. 39/- per square yard. The appellants shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits.
The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
6.11.2008 vs.
( Rajesh Bindal) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the compensation awarded in a section 18 reference under the Land Acquisition Act for relatively smaller land should be enhanced based on judicial precedents regarding nearby larger land acqui
Whether similar market rates determined for nearby land under different notifications can be applied to determine the value of the acquired land?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Prem Gupta vs The Improvement Trust, LudhianaRelied on¶16
Civil Writ Petition No. 4890 of 1986 Prem Gupta vs The Improvement Trust, Ludhiana
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jagdish Chander and others
Shri Hardial Singh Sidhu and another
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
