Gian Singh etc. Vs Punjab State etc.

By way of filing the pres e nt appeal challenge has b e en laid to the decision dated 06.04.1999 passed by the lear n ed Addition a l District Judge, Gurdaspur, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Referen c e Court’). 2. Briefly stating, some lan d , situated in Village Sidhauri, Tehsil Pathankot, was acquired by the Government of Punjab v ide notificati o ns dated 27.12.1993 a n d 30.01.1995, issued un d er Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acqu i sition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') for public purpose. At the time of acquisition, certain f ruit bearing t rees as well as non-fruit bea r ing trees existed over the same and a s e parate award No.17 dated 29.01.1997 was passed by the Land A c quisition Collector (for sho r t ‘the LAC’) in exercise of its

¶14

SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶15

RFA-2368-1999 (O&M) [2]

¶16

powers u nder Section 11 of the Act, i n this regard.

¶17

Being dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, the appellan t s/ landowners filed referenc e petition seeking enhancement of comp e nsation by invoking Section 18 of the Act, which came to be dismiss e d vide decision dated 06 . 04.1999. Hence, the present appeal.

¶18

While impugning the afor e said decision, learned cou n sel for the a p pellants submits that the as s essment of market value for t he fruit bea r ing as well as the non-fruit bearing trees was made by t he LAC ha v ing relied upon formula dat e d 15.05.1985 prepared by Dr. G.S. Nij j ar, the then Director of H o rticulture, Punjab, Chandig a rh. Learned counsel also submits that th e acquisition proceedings in the present case were initiated vide no t ification dated 27.12.1993 a nd thus the assessment of compensation should have been carried out by givin g appropriate increase bet w een May 1985 to Decem b er, 1993, b y relying upon the price inde x prevailing at that point in ti m e. In supp o rt, learned counsel for the a ppellants places reliance u p on the deci s ion dated 02.08.2012 pass e d in RFA-3478-1992, titled as Kartar Singh and Karnail Singh sons of Shri Kesar Singh son of Shri Kesar Singh successor in interest of late Shri Kesar, both residents of Village Hardosaran, Tehsil Pathankot Vs. Punjab State through Collector Gurdaspur and others . 5. On the other hand, learne d State counsel submits that the assess m ent of market value as rega r ds the trees was carried out by

¶19

SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶20

RFA-2368-1999 (O&M) [3]

¶21

the LAC having relied upon the for m ula dated 15.05.1985 and the time ga p between the date of form u la and the notification was not much, thus the appellants were not e n titled for any appreciation.

¶22

I have heard learned co u nsel for the parties and g o ne through t he paper-book. I find substa n ce in the submissions made on behalf o f the appellants. 7. Acquisition in the present case was carried out v ide notificati o n dated 27.12.1993 issued u nder Section 4 of the 1894 A ct and the assessment of compensati o n was made on the basis of formula d ated 15.05.1985 whereas, undisputedly between 1985-1 9 93 there h a d been appropriate increas e in the price index which h ad gone from 127 points to 272 points t hereby making increase of 1 45 per cen t over the price assessed b y Dr. G.S. Nijjar in its formula dated 1 5 .05.1985. The aforementi o ned increase has even b e en approve d by this Court in Kartar Singh case (supra). Relevant p a ra thereof i s reproduced hereunder:-

¶23

“The appeal is for enhancement o f compensation for val u e of the trees which were lost t o the owner by the ac q uisition of land. The grievanc e expressed is that the Reference Court had accepte d the valuation of the t rees made as per the formul a called 'Dr. Nijjar's for m ula' for assessing the trees f o r the year 1985. The le a rned counsel for the appellant s would argue that in Punjab Small Industries an d Export Corporation L i mited Versus Zail Singh in RF A No.1907 of 2002, de c ided on 28.09.2010, this Cou r t had factored the incr e ase for assessment of value o f

¶24

SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶25

RFA-2368-1999 (O&M) [4]

¶26

trees for the subseq u ent years by taking note of th e increase in price in d ex. In this case, the learne d counsel argues that as against the valuation made a s per Dr. Nijjar's form u la of the year 1985, the pric e index had gone from 1 27 points to 150 points in 198 7 . This, according to hi m , would mean an increase o f 23% over the price a s sessed by the application of D r . Nijjar's formula.

¶27

2. I adopt the v a luation and would provide f o r 23% increase on t h e valuation made as per th e application of Dr. Nijj a r's formula……..”

¶28

This Court, even in case of Union of India and another

¶29

versus Pritam Singh, 2004(4) RCR 5 , under similar facts, h as upheld t h e increase based on differe n ce of the wholesale price ind e x. 9. Accordingly, in view of th e discussion made hereinab o ve, the pres e nt appeal is allowed. Impu g ned decision dated 06.04.1 9 99 passed b y the learned Reference Co u rt is set aside to the extent that the app e llants/ landowners shall be e n titled for increase of 145% over and abo v e the amount assessed by t h e Collector vide its award da t ed 29.01.1 9 97 towards compensation f o r the fruit bearing trees as w ell as non-fruit bearing trees, beside s all other statutory ben e fits provided under the Act. 10. Pending misc. applicati o n(s), if any, shall also st a nd dispose d of. 24.02.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) sanjay JUDGE

¶30

Whether speaking/reason e d? Yes/No Whether Reportable? Yes/No

¶31

SANJAY GUPTA 2026.02.24 19:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Gian Singh etc. v. Punjab State etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gian Singh etc. v. Punjab State etc.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prem Chand Vs Satyapal and Others

Raj Kumar & Another Vs State of Haryana

Sube Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Shri Bhagwan and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Satish Vs State of Haryana and Others

Jalla Ram Vs State of Punjab and Ors.