STATE OF HARYANA Vs. NAND LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of R.F.A. No. 1133 of 1984 filed by the State of Haryana and Cross Objections No. 105-C of 1984 filed by the claimant-respondent.

(2.) THE land of the claimant-respondent measuring 3 kanals 5 marlas situated at Shahbad was acquired. A notice under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevitiy, 'the Act') expressing the intention to acquire the land was issued on 24.1.1977. The Land Acquisition Collector (Directorate of Agriculture, Haryana, Chandigarh) vide its award dated 20.1.1978 assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 9,760/- per acre. The respondent-land-owner filed objections under section 18 of the Act for referring the matter to the District Judge for determination of the market value of the acquired land and claimed that market value cannot be less than Rs. 10,000/- per kanal. The District Judge after referring to various sale instances came to the conclusion that only one sale instance Ex.P-7 dated 15.12.1972 would be relevant because there the total land sold was 2 bighas 7 biswas for Rs. 14,206.58 which was the sale deed executed by the claimant-respondent/cross objector in favour of Warehousing Corporation for the construction of Warehouse. Accordingly, the District Judge ordered that the market value of the acquired land would be Rs. 50,000/- per acre. The view of the learned District Judge reads as under :-

(3.) MR . Akshay Bhan, learned counsel for the claimant-respondent/cross-objector has argued that there are eight sale instances which have been placed on record to show that the market value of the land was about Rs. 1 lac or more than Rs. 1 lac per acre. It has been claimed that the claimant- respondent/cross objector was entitled to higher amount of compensation. It has further been claimed that no benefit of amendment provisions of the Act by granting enhanced compensation or solatium has been given. In support of their submission, the learned counsel have placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and another v. Raghubir Singh (dead) by LRs. etc., AIR 1989 SC 1933 : 1989(1) RRR 552 (SC) to argue that in all the cases where the determination of market value by the learned District Judge under Section 18 of the Act has been made after 30.4.1982, the claimants have been held entitled to the benefit of amended provisions.