Harjeet Singh Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

This common decision deals with 03 Regular First Appeals, the details of which are p rovided in the footnote of t his judgment. All these appeals stem fr o m a common acquisition/aw a rd involving similar facts and legal quest i ons. For brevity, facts are ta k en from RFA No. 2639 of 1999 .

¶15

By way of present appeal(s), challenge has been lai d to the Aw a rd dated 05.05.1999 pas s ed by the Court of lear n ed Addition a l District Judge, Sirsa-cum- R eference Court. 3. In the present case, 1.2 2 acres of land situated in the revenue estate of Village Shamshab a d Patti, Hadbast No.82, Te h sil

¶16

SANJAY GUPTA 2025.11.27 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶17

RFA-2639-1999 (O&M) & 2 others [ 2]

¶18

and Dis t rict Sirsa was acquired vid e notifications dated 01.10.1 9 92 and 05.05.1993 issued under Se c tions 4 and 6 of the L a nd Acquisiti o n Act, 1894, for short ‘t h e Act’ respectively, for pu b lic purpose, namely, for the development and utilization of land for Mandi T o wnship. The Land Acquisiti o n Collector (for short ‘the L A C’) vide aw a rd dated 03.05.1995, ass e ssed the market value of t he acquired land @ Rs.3,00,000/- per acre along with Rs.2000/for existing t ubewell along with other stat u tory benefits.

¶19

Dissatisfied with the af o resaid award, the appella n ts/ landown e rs filed reference petition i n voking Section 18 of the A ct, which c a me to be disposed of by th e learned Reference Court v ide award d a ted 05.05.1999 determining t he market value of the acquired land @ R s.130/- per sq. yards along with 30% solatium, besides all other st a tutory benefits under the Act. 5. Still aggrieved of the A ward passed by the lear n ed Referen c e Court, the present appeal s were preferred at the insta n ce of appell a nts / landowners. 6. Impugning the aforementi o ned award, learned counsel for the app e llant(s) submits that the lear n ed Reference Court went wr o ng while ig n oring the sale deed Ex.P1 dated 30.06.1992 vide whic h 7 marlas of land comprised in Khasra N o. 37/26 was sold for a su m of Rs.50,000/- and the base value per ac r e was Rs.11,42,057/-(Rs.236 per sq. yard s ). He also points out that fro m the evidence it was establis h ed that the s ale deed Ex.P1 also formed p art of the acquired land and t h us

¶20

SANJAY GUPTA 2025.11.27 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

RFA-2639-1999 (O&M) & 2 others [ 3]

¶22

the sa m e was required to be relied upon for the purpose of determin a tion of market value. 7. On the other hand, learne d counsel appearing on behal f of the res p ondents submits that the a ward passed by the lear n ed Referen c e Court was based on proper appreciation of pleadings and the evidence available on record and thus calls for no interference. He a lso points o u t that appellants/ landowner s were already granted sufficient market v a lue while taking into account the sale deeds Ex.R1 to Ex. R 16 which w e re produced on record whereby the average market price w as approxi m ately Rs.20 per sq. yard. 8. I have head learned co u nsel for the parties and g o ne through the paper-book as well as records of the case. 9. A perusal of the record sh o ws that the sale instance Ex.P1 dated 30.06.1992 forms part of Khasra No. 37/26 which was also pa r t of the acqu i red land and a positive findin g to this effect has been recor d ed by the le a rned Reference Court in par a graph 19 of the impugned award and the s ame being relevant, is reprod u ced hereunder:-

¶23

“19. PW1 Vij a y Kumar has asserted on o a th that he sold th e land comprised in Khasra N o. 37/26 measuri n g 0 Kanal 7 Marla for a total s a le consideration o f Rs.50000/- vide sale de e d Ex.P1 dated 3 0 .6.1992 prior to the notificati o n. He has further s tated that the plot is situated o n the road which leads from Dabwali Road to C i vil Hosp ital, Sirs a and is just at a distance of 1 0 0 feet from Natio n al Highway No.10. This plot fa lls adjacent to C- B lock, Anaj Mandit and is near to

¶24

SANJAY GUPTA 2025.11.27 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

RFA-2639-1999 (O&M) & 2 others [ 4]

¶26

the commerci a l premises. Petitioner Sus h il Kumar has pu r chased the land acquired vi d e sale deed date d 30.6.92 for a total considerati o n of Rs. 50,00 0 /- but the Land Acquisiti o n Collector has n ot considered this aspect. T h e learned couns e l for the claimants has referr e d AIR 1997 S.C. 2625 Special Collector & oth e rs Vs. Srivaswa R oy & others wherein it has be e n held that the s a le transactions in respect of t h e acquired land t o which the claimant himself i s a party is the best evidence and the s a le transactions of the negihbouring land are al s o relevant. The l e arned counsel for the claima n ts has further reli e d upon 1994 (2) RCR 497 (P& H ) Sudhir Kumar V s. State of Punjab.”

¶27

In view of the above, th e learned Reference Court w as required to rely upon the sale deed E x .P1. Moreover, a perusal of the site plan attached along with the rec o rd also shows that the acquired land is a butting Sirsa-Dabwali Road ( H ighway) and thus has pote n tial and loca t ional advantage attached to it, as such in the given fact s , a lesser c u t of 25% is being applied ove r the sale price of Ex.P1, towards smallness of area involved therein a s compared to the acquired l a nd which m e asures 1.22 acres. Further m ore, it may be noticed that f r om the reco r ds it is established that the a c quired area has got potential for being used as residential and comm e rcial as depicted from the f a cts that all t h e appellants in this set of ap p eals own small plots measu r ing 19 marl a s, 7 marlas and 1 kanal-1 m a rla in their respective names as Harjit Si n gh, Sushil and Vijay Kumar.

¶28

SANJAY GUPTA 2025.11.27 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶29

RFA-2639-1999 (O&M) & 2 others [ 5]

¶30

In view of the above, the m arket value of the acquired a nd forming part of the revenue estate of Village Shamshadbad P a tti, District S irsa comes to Rs.236/- pe r sq. yards -25% deduction i.e. Rs.177/per sq. yards (Rs.8,56,680/- per acre). The appella n ts/ landown e rs shall also be entitled for all other statutory benefits a nd interest p rovided under the provision s of 1894 Act (as amended upto date).

¶31

Consequently, the app e als filed by the appella n ts/ landown e rs are allowed in the afores a id terms. 13. Further, wherever, the landowner(s) has/h a ve unfortun a tely expired in the appeal( s )/ cross-objection(s) after filing thereof a nd the legal heirs have not b een impleaded, they shall b e at liberty t o seek execution of the present decision by mo v ing appropri a te application(s) before the l e arned Executing Court. 14. Pending any miscellane o us application(s), if any, s h all also be d isposed of.