GAJINDER SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land Acqusition Act, 1894 against the order passed by learned Additional District Judge, Delhi on a reference made to him under Section 18 of the Act. Notification under Section 4 of the Act acquiring land of the appellant was issued on 4.9.1967 and the Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 6.3.1968. The award is dated 21.11.81 bearing No. 41/81-82. By this Award, the Collector assessed the market value of the land at the rate of Rs. 1400.00 per bigha. Not satisfied, the appeallant sought reference and by judgment dated 18.8.86. the learned ADJ enhanced the market value of the land and fixed the same at the rate of Rs. 20, 000.00 per bigha. Still not satisfied the appellant filed this appeal claiming the market value at the @ Rs. 40,000.00 per bigha.

(2.) MISS Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has referred to two judgements in support of the appeal. One judgment (Ex. P-6) is given by Sh. S.R.Goel. Add). District Judge which is dated 29.3.1974. In fact, the impugned judgement before us is also by the same learned Judge. In this judgement (Ex.P-6) the land had been acquired under Delhi Municipal Corporation Act for laying certain water mains. The land was situated in the same very village and the Notification acquiring land was issued on 1.11.68. The learned Judge fixed the marketg value of the land at the rate of Rs. 40.00 per sq. yards. He did not rely on his judgement in the present case for two reasons, one, that the water main line was laid after 11.9.1968 which is the date of Notification there and second. Union of India was not aparty in that case. ' We have seen the judgement Ex. P-6 and we find that the reasoning given by learned Judge is suffering from obvious faults. The judgment dated 29.3.74 (Ex. P6) is well considered judgement after taking into account all the relevant evidence. The main dispute is that case was not that between private party and the_MCD in as much as we are concerned with the value of the land and the judgement was therefore correct. The second judgement is of a Bench of this Court and is in RFA No. 170 of 1971 and is dated 22.4.1987. In this case this Court awarded compensation at the rate fo Rs. 45.00 per sq. yards and the land was situate in village Dhaka. While Ms. Jain contends that Dhaka and Dahirpur is one village, contention of Ms. Shashi Kiran is that these are two separate villages though adjoining to each other. In RFA No. 170/71 the NotiFication under Section 4 of the Act is dated 7.10.1964 and that of Section 6 of the Act is dated 29.12.64. As noted above, in the present case the NotiFication under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 4.9.67. Even if the village Dhaka and Dahirpur are adjacent to each other, we are of the view that taking into account the two judgements (Ex P-6 and that of RFA 170/71), the impugned judgement does not give the propermarket value of the acquired land of the appellant. We also Find that the village Dhaka is adjoining to developed conlony Model Town and beyond this village is also developed colony which is called Nirankari Colony, Village Dahirpur is situated one and a half KM from main Mall Road (Kingsway Camp crossing). We are. therefore, of the opinion that the market value of the land of the appellant should have been Rs: 40.00 per sq. yard. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The market value of the land is enhanced by Rs. 20.00 per sq. yards. We fix the market value of the land at the rate of Rs. 40.00 per sq. yard or Rs. 40,000.00 per bigha. The interest and solatium shall be as awarded by the ADJ but on the amount of the market value fixed by us. Appellant will be entitled to cost limited to court fee.