HARINDER SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE land of the appellants, measuring 9 kanlas 6 marlas and located in Manimajra, was acquired by the Union of India, after invoking the urgency clause under Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (to be referred as the Act). The acquisition was for a public purpose viz. for setting up a Glazed Pottery Kiln. The two notifications viz. notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act were issued on the same date viz. 31.3.1976. The compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector, Chandigarh, was at the rate of Rs. 18,000/- per acre. On an application moved under Section 18 of the Act by the appellants, it was enhanced to Rs. 33,600/- per acre by the District Judge vide award dated 6.5.1980. The appellants, by filing this RFA, have claimed further enhancement of compensation to Rs. 1 lac per acre, on the ground that in a case pertaining to the acquisition of another land located at a distance of just half a mile away from the land under reference, the District Judge, Chandigarh, had earlier awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 3,27,200/- per acre and the same amount of compensation was awarded by him in two other cases bearing LAC Nos. 26 and 16 of 1978, decided vide a common judgment dated 22.8.1979.

(2.) THE Union of India having opposed the claimed enhancement, I have heard arguments addressed by Mr. H.S. Gill, learned counsel for the appellants, and Mr. K.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) THE other two instances covered by mutations P2 and P3 were not taken into consideration as those pertained to the sale of small plots. The mutation, Ex. P1, it may be mentioned related to the sale of a much bigger plot viz. a plot measuring 6 kanals 11 marlas and the transaction covered by it had also taken place within one year of the date of issuance of the notifications (dated 31.3.1976) under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act in respect of the land involved in the case in hand. Placing reliance on this sale instance and after taking into consideration the general appreciation in the value of the land in question during the intervening period of about one year, fair compensation of the land was assessed at the rate of Rs. 33,600/- per acre by the District Judge. He rightly ignored the five sale transactions relied upon by the Union of India and covered by mutations Exs. R1 to R5 as the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector himself in respect of the land in question was at a much higher rate than the price at which the land involved in those transactions had been sold.