Allowed

Kulwant Kaur v. State of Haryana and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Jul 2009RFA/1681/1991

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows appeals by landowners dissatisfied with the compensation award under the Land Acquisition Act. The High Court increased the market value from Rs.1,20,000/- to Rs.1,28,000/- per acre, rejecting reliance on an old 1981 acquisition decision in favor of a 1986 sale of a small portion of the acquired land.

What did the court decide?

Market value fixed at Rs.1,28,000/- per acre. Statutory benefits under Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 granted. Costs awarded to appellants.

Kulwant Kaur Vs State of Haryana and Others — Land Acquisition | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

RFA No.1681 of 1991

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Date of decision 27.10.2009 1. RFA No.1681 of 1991 Kulwant Kaur ..... Appellant V/s State of Haryana & Another .....Respondents 2. RFA No.1682 of 1991 Beant Kaur ..... Appellant V/s State of Haryana & Another .....Respondents 3. RFA No.1683 of 1991 Narinder Pal Singh ..... Appellant V/s State of Haryana & Another .....Respondents 4. RFA No.1684 of 1991 Varinder Kaur ..... Appellant V/s State of Haryana & Another .....Respondents 5. RFA No.1685 of 1991 Varsha Rani ..... Appellant V/s State of Haryana .....Respondent 6. RFA No.1720 of 1991 Ram Devi ..... Appellant V/s State of Haryana, through Collector, Karnal .....Respondent

¶5

RFA No.1681 of 1991

¶6

¶7

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

¶8

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶9

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶10

Whether the judgment should be report in the Digest?

¶11

Present: Mr.S.S.Narula, Advocate, for the appellant(s).

¶12

Mr.Lokesh Sinhal, Addl.A.G., Haryana.

¶13

HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶14

This order shall dispose of 6 appeals filed by the land-owners aggrieved against the Award rendered by the learned Reference Court on 04.03.1991.

¶15

The land measuring 218 Kanals 14 Marlas was acquired for the public purpose i.e. construction of the Tehsil complex vide notification dated 11.05.1987 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'). Notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 02.05.1988 was published. The Land Acquisition Collector announced his award on 07.11.1988 and determined market value at the rate of Rs.28,000/- per acre for Chahi Land; Rs.26,000/- per acre for Nehri Land and Rs.35,000/- per acre for Mix Irrigated Land.

¶16

The aggrieved land-owners have sought reference for determination of the proper market value under Section 18 of the Act, dissatisfied with the Award of the Land Acquisition Collector. Learned Reference Court determined Rs.1,20,000/- as the market value. It is the said Award, which is subject matter of challenge in the present set of appeals.

¶17

Learned Reference Court has relied upon Ex.P-2, a decision of this Court in RFA No.35 of 1985 titled “Surinder Singh Vs. State of

¶18

RFA No.1681 of 1991

¶19

¶20

Haryana” dated 18.1.1989 in respect of market value of the land measuring 54 kanals 16 marlas acquired vide notification in the year 1981.

¶21

Learned Reference Court found that the said decision pertains to acquisition of land in the year 1981 and of a small area, therefore, the compensation of Rs.1,20,000/- awarded in respect of aforesaid acquisition does not warrant any enhancement though the acquisition in the present case is later in point of time.

¶22

Learned counsel for the appellant(s) has argued that the land, which was subject matter of consideration in Surinder Singh's case was intended to be acquired in the year 1981. The said land is situated at a distance of 1½ kilometers from the acquired land. After the said acquisition, Assandh has been declared to be Sub Division. The acquisition in the year 1981 was also not of a small area, but of 54 kanals. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation over and above than what was awarded in respect of acquisition in the year 1981.

¶23

Learned counsel for the appellant(s) has further relied upon sale deed dated 16.5.1986 Ex.P-7, whereby 15 Marlas of land has been sold for a sum of Rs.15,000/- i.e. at the rate of Rs.1000/- per marla. The land sold is part of khasra No.39 i.e. part of the acquired land. It is contended that though sale is of small area, but the same being part of the acquired land could not have been ignored by the learned Reference Court though at best suitable deduction from the sale consideration could be made.

¶24

On behalf of the respondents, it has been argued that sale instance Ex.P-7 has been rightly ignored by the learned Reference Court as the same is of a small area. It was further argued that in case of sale of a small area, 1/3^rd is the normal rule of deduction for determining the market value,

¶25

RFA No.1681 of 1991

¶26

¶27

though in the present case, the said sale instance is not relevant.

¶28

The compensation of Rs.1,20,000/- has been awarded by the learned Reference Court relying upon determination of market value in respect of acquisition of land measuring 54 Kanals 16 Marlas acquired in the year 1981. Thereafter, many development activities have taken place such as declaration of Assandh as a Sub Division. Therefore, the said determination of the market value on the basis of acquisition of land in the year 1981 though relevant is not the best evidence.

¶29

The best piece of evidence is Ex.P-7, wherein 15 Marlas of the acquired land was sold on 16.5.1986 i.e. almost a year prior to the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act. The per acre price in terms of sale instance Ex.P-7 comes to Rs.1,60,000/- per acre. Since the sale is of acquired land but of a small area, therefore, 20% deduction on account of acquisition of fund developed land can be said to be suitable. Therefore, market value is determined at Rs.1,28,000/- per acre.

¶30

In view of the above, the present appeals are allowed. The market value of the acquired land is determined at the rate of Rs.1,28,000/- per acre. The appellant(s) shall be entitled to statutory benefits contemplated under Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended. The appellant(s) shall be entitled to the costs as well.

¶31

(HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE

¶32

27.10.2009 shamsher/vimal

Kulwant Kaur v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulwant Kaur v. State of Haryana and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurdip Singh Vs Isher Singh

Shiv Sant Singh Vs State of Punjab etc.

Bagial Co-Op L and C Society Vs Punjab Mandi Board

Santosh Aggarwal Vs Harvender Singh and Anr.

(O&M) Suraj Vs State of Haryana

Municipal Corporation Ludhiana & Ors. Vs Raghbir Kaur and Anr.