RAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The land owner is in appeal seeking further enhancement of compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 28.3.1995, issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), State of Haryana acquired 0.38 acres of land in village Bhulwana, Tehsil Hodel, District Faridabad for construction of Delhi-Mathura Road (National Highway -2). The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, 'the Collector') awarded compensation @ Rs. 66,737.00 per acre for all kinds of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the land owner filed objections. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below assessed the market value of the acquired land @ Rs. 2,75,000.00 per acre.

(2.) Learned counsel for the land owners submitted that while assessing the compensation for small portion of 0.38 acres of land, acquired for the purpose of expansion of National Highway No. 1, the learned court below has failed to consider the evidence produced on record by the land owners. He referred to sale deed (Ex. P1) dated 9.12.1985, vide which 5 kanals and 10 marlas of land owned by the appellant and adjoining to the acquired land was sold for a sum of Rs. 80,000.00, i.e., approximately Rs. 1,20,000.00 per acre. The submission is that in case increase @ 12% per annum cumulative is awarded thereon, considering the same to be the best piece of evidence, the value of the acquired land would come out to Rs. 3,42,752.00 per acre. Another sale deed, relied upon by learned counsel for the land owners, is Ex. P2, vide which 21 kanals and 5 marlas of land was sold for a sum of Rs. 10,62,500.00, i.e., at an average price of Rs. 4,00,000.00 per acre. The aforesaid sale deed was registered on 31.8.1995. The vendee therein was a limited company. Out of the sale consideration, Rs. 10,000.00 was paid in cash and the remaining amount was paid by way of bank draft. The submission was that even if the aforesaid sale deed was registered about 5 months after the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act, the genuineness of the aforesaid sale deed cannot be doubted. At the most, a reasonable cut can be applied and the compensation assessed. If for a period of 5 months, 5% cut is applied, the amount of compensation would come out to Rs. 3,80,000.00 per acre. As regards location of the land, it was submitted that it is not disputed that the same is located on National Highway No. 1. It is merely one kilometer from Dubchik Tourist Complex and had great future potential, as commercial, residential or industrial growth starts from the land located on the road.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that there is no question of placing reliance on the sale deed, which was registered about 10 years prior to the acquisition. There is no set principle for grant of increase @ 12% per annum cumulative. Even if the aforesaid sale deed (Ex. P1) is considered and increase @ 12% per annum simple is granted, the compensation would come out to Rs. 2,56,000.00 per acre. The sale deed (Ex. P2) cannot be relied upon for the reason that the same was registered after the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act and further the location of the land is not pointed out on any of the site plan produced on record. He further submitted that three sale deeds produced on record by the State (Ex. R1 to Ex. R3) were not considered at all by the learned court below, which justified the award of the Collector. However, in any case, no enhancement can be granted to the land owner at this stage. The prayer was for dismissal of the appeal.