VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against award of the reference court, seeking further enhancement of the compensation for the land of the appellant acquired by the State of Haryana for development of residential area in Sector-28, Faridabad. Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the land in question was issued on 01.10.1973. Vide his award dated 22.02.1974, the Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 124 per marla, apart from compensation of Heena plantation at the rate of Rs. 12 per marla. The reference court has enhanced the compensation for the land to Rs. 18 per square yard and that of Heena plantation to Re. 1/- per square yard.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant submitted that compensation should be enhanced to Rs. 29.50 per square yard and compensation for Heena plantation should be raised to Rs. 3/- per square yard. Reference was made to award of reference court in relation to acquisition of adjoining land for setting up Sector 27A, wherein, compensation has been enhanced to Rs. 24/- per square yard. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that since notification under Section 4 of the Act in that case was dated 07.10.1971, 12% enhancement ought to be given on the said rate for acquisition in the present case, for which notification under Section 4 of the Act had been issued on 01.10.1973. Alternatively, he submits that this court in RFA No. 1434 of 1988 decided on 08.10.1998 awarded rate of Rs. 22.54 per square yard for the land in Sector-27-A. He referred to evidence of AW8 at page 404 of the record to the effect that the land in question was two Furlongs from G.T. road and there was a link road with Abadi of old Faridabad also. He submits that the witness was not cross-examined on this point. He also referred to Akshajra, Ex.A6 and map showing that Sector-28 in Faridabad was on the main Mathura Road. He also referred to judgment Ex. A14 at page 124 of the record, wherein, in para 42 rate of Heena plantation was held to be Re. 1 per square yard and the rate of Heena was Rs. 45 per Maund, wherein, notification for acquisition issued on 18.01.1960. He submitted that AW1 Naresh Chand Mandi Supervisor at page 391 of the record stated that rate of Heena was Rs. 268.87 per quintal and AW7 Rattan Lal stated the rate of Heena to be Rs. 330/- per qunital in the year 1973 and yield to be 40 Maunds per acre. The appellant himself appeared as AW8 and stated that rate of Heena was Rs. 350/- per quintal and market value of the land was Rs. 50 per square yard. He submitted that since rate of Re. 1 per square yard for Heena plantation was being awarded when price of Heena plantation was Rs. 45/- per Maund and price of Heena plantation has gone up by six times, the rate of Heena should be at least thrice.

(3.) AFTER hearing counsel for the parties, I do not find any ground to permit additional evidence at this stage. No doubtt, an award can be taken into account as evidence for determining market value of the acquired land, but when evidence with regard to the land covered by the same notification is available, award in relation to some other notification and which is away from the acquired land, may not be relevant. Application for additional evidence is dismissed.