UNION OF INDIA Vs. ARAVALI KROSHI ANUVANASHAK LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the above mentioned regular first appeals arise from one and the same award dated 9.5.1992 passed by the learned District Judge, Gurgaon. RFA No. 2147 of 1992 has been preferred by the claimant for enhancement of the awarded compensation on account of land, building, trees etc. while RFA No. 2104 of 1992 has been preferred by the Union of India praying that the compensation awarded is exorbitantly unreasonable and prays for restoration of the award of the Collector. In view of these circumstances, I would dispose of both the above appeals by a common judgment.

(2.) ON 27.10.1988 State of Haryana issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), acquiring 1275 kanals 4 marlas. Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 3.7.1989. Possession of the land was taken in accordance with law. The Collector after providing opportunity to the parties of leading evidence and hearing, notified his award on 14.11.1990 awarding compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs. One lac per acre for Chahi land, for Bhood land Rs. 80,000/- per acre, for Banjar land Rs. 70,000/- and for Gair Mumkin land Rs. 60,000/-. In the award it was specifically noticed that compensation in regard to super-structure, plants and trees was not assessed for want of reports from the concerned quarters. The claimants M/s. Aravali Krishi Anuvanshak Limited a company duly incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act claimed that it owned 66 Kanals 17 Marlas of land out of the acquired land. According to them, the land was developed, beautified and they had established a factory, wind-mill, tubewell, cropping sheds, flower glasses and they had incurred heavy expenditure on developing the land. It was further stated that the land in question was situated at Gurgaon-Alwar Highway within the jurisdiction of Tehsil Gurgaon, near the foot of Aravali range. The entire project was laid by the company after receiving no objection certificate from the concerned quarters. They produced on record various large documentary and oral evidence on record in support of their case and claim and prayed before the District Judge, Gurgaon to enhance the compensation given to them at the rate of Rs. 1000/- per square yard. In addition to the award of compensation, they claimed Rs. 60 lacs on account of super-structures and Rs. 50 lacs for garden and orchards. The application of the claimants under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was forwarded to the District Judge and the learned District Judge dealt with the case expeditiously and while awarding compensation on account of cost of acquired land granted Rs. 450/- per square yard i.e. Rs. 21,78,000/- per acre, for super-structures etc. Rs. 46,54,450/-, for horticulture items Rs. 35,00,000/- and further awarded by way of damages for the unacquired portion of land at the rate of Rs. 225/- per square yard under the provisions of the Act and also granted solatium, interest and other charges at the increased statutory rates under the Act. It will be appropriate to note the reasoning given, by reference to the relevant parts of the judgment recorded by the learned Judge for awarding the said compensation :

(3.) IN order to examine merits of these contentions the first and the fore-most thing which the Court has to deal with in some elucidation is the evidence on record. The claimants examined 16 witnesses to prove and justify their claim for enhancement. In the statements of these witnesses they led enormous documentary evidence. Agreements to sell Ex. P.5 to P.13, photographs of the land in question, buildings, horticulture, trees and other developments on the said land allegedly carried out by the claimants were sought to be depicted by photographs Ex. P.15 to P.110 and their negatives were exhibited on record as Ex. P.111 to P.206 besides sale-deeds Ex. P.227, P.228 and P.238. All the sale deeds related to village Bhondsi, Tehsil Sohna. The awards/judgments of the Courts of Additional District Judge and District Judge were produced and exhibited on record as Ex. P.229, P.230 and P.239 of village Islampur, Jharsa and Chakarpur respectively in regard to notifications dated 12.10.1983, 10.1.1983 and 10.12.1984. In addition to this and to show the high price of the acquired land, the claimant also produced on record plot agreement executed by M/s Ansals in favour of the allottee Ex. P.237. The reports with regard to the trees, horticulture, constructions, buildings etc. were produced and proved by PW1 and PW2 as Ex. P.1 to Ex. P.4 in addition to assessment reports P.211 and P.212. This also included the site plan placed by the claimants on record. Certain other miscellaneous evidence was proved on record which is not very material for the purposes of determining the controversy in issue. They also referred to Ex.P. 14, letter of the competent authority that the acquired land did not fall in controlled area.