STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SURESH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this bunch of appeals, whereas obvious prayer of the claimants in R.F.A. Nos. 1824 of 1990, 1823, 1868, 1869, 1870 of 1991, 33 to 43, 273, 274, 468, 1230 and 1231 of 1995 is to increase the compensation which has already been assessed by the learned Additional District Judge, prayer of the State and Market Committee in R.F.A. Nos. 1869-A, 1870-A, 1871,1872 and 1874 of 1991, 409 to 426 and 524 of 1995, 393 to 408 and 428 to 430 of 1995, once again obviously, is to uphold the market value that was assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector and consequently set aside the award passed by the Additional District Judge enhancing the market value. All the claim applications were consolidated by the Additional District Judge and disposed of by common order. Learned counsel for the parties suggest this Court as well that all these matters may be disposed of by a common order.

(2.) Brief facts of the case reveal that an area measuring 88 Kanals 2 Marias was notified for acquisition on July 27, 1987 when notification for the purpose came to be issued Under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. The public purpose for acquisition was construction of Sub Divisional Offices and residential houses of the officers at Safidon. After notification, follow up declaration Under Section 6 was issued and claimant/land owners were invited to file their objections with regard to determination of compensation and after due formalities were observed, the Land Acquisition Collector, vide his award dated March 28, 1989, determined market value of the land @ Rs. 80,000/- per acre. Being aggrieved, the claimants filed their applications Under Section 18 of the Act seeking reference to be made to the Court for determination of correct market value of their land at the time of acquisition i.e. at the time when notification Under Section 4 of the Act was issued. It was, inter alia, pleaded by the claimants that all the relevant factors for determining the market value of the land were not considered by the Land Acquisition Collector. The land was situated within the municipal limits of Safidon town and rate of the land in the vicinity, where the acquired land is situated, was not less than Rs. 700/- per sq. yard. It was also pleaded that the main abadi of Safidon city was at a distance of 100-125 yards from the acquired land and there was a market, cinema and workshops etc. at a distance of 200 yards from the land under acquisition. The acquired land had a potential of being converted into residential and commercial use. On these broad facts, the claimants prayed that the market value of the land be assessed @ Rs. 700/- per sq. yard. Pursuant to the notice issued by the Court, the State entered defence and opposed the cause of the claimants, by pleading that the award given by the Land Acquisition Collector was just and proper and that the land under acquisition was being used for agricultural purpose and had no potential value whatsoever. It was also pleaded that there was no population near the acquired land and there were no houses at all near the acquired land.

(3.) As in every such matter, in this case as well the only question is with regard to determination of market value of the acquired land when notification Under Section 4 of the Act was issued. Before that exercise is, however, taken in hand, it shall be relevant to determine as to whether the land under acquisition had a potential of being converted into an industrial/commercial/residential use. It is not disputed that the land under acquisition is situated within the,municipal limits of Safidon town as also that there is Rampura road towards North of the acquired land. There is kacha rasta towards the South of the acquired land and towards West-North there' is Rajbah. There is a bus stand across the road from the eastern corner of the acquired land and Alora theatre adjoins the new bus stand. Abadi of city Safidon is at a distance of one or 1-1/4 Kms. and there are few shops adjoining the Alora theatre. These facts which stand either admitted or proved, in view of this Court are enough to hold, as was held by the learned Addl. District Judge, that even though the land under acquisition did not have any potential of being converted into a commercial use, it certainly had the residential potential value. Mr. Sharma, learned D.A.G., Haryana, during the course of arguments, had to concede that the findings of the learned Additional District Judge that the land under acquisition had a residential potential were based upon valid reasons. He, however, contends that there was no legal, relevant or admissible evidence so as to hold that the market value of the land was the one as has been assessed by the learned Addl. District Judge. Mr. O.P. Goel, learned counsel for the claimants, however, contends that the market value assessed by the learned Addl. District Judge is based upon sale instances which are relevant and in fact while taking into consideration the said sale instances, learned Addl. District Judge has erred in assessing the market value of the land on lower side. In other words, based upon the same very sale instances, as were relied upon by the learned Addl. District Judge, Mr. Goel contends that the market value of the land bad to be assessed as was demanded by the claimants. The diametrical opposite stands taken by learned counsel for the parties to necessarily require examination of all sale instances relied upon by the claimants and to find out as to whether the same are admissible and relevant. The sale instances, Ex.P4 to P-11 relied upon by the claimants are tabulated below:- <TAB> Ex. Date of Sale Area Price per Price Distance from sold sq. yard acquired land P4 24.3.87 30 Sq.Y. 20,000/- 666.65 238' P5 24.3.87 20-1/2 Sq.Y. 12,000/- 585.00 230' P6 24.3.87 26 Sq.Y. 17,000/- 653.80 245' P7 25.3.87 37 Sq.Y. 15,000/- 405.00 220' P8 6.8.84 120 Sq.Y. 14,400/- 120.00 Part of acquired land belongs to Nirmal petitioner. P9 6.8.84 90 Sq.Y. 10,800/- 120.00 Part of acquired land belonging to petitioner Kusum. P10 6.6.84 120 Sq.Y. 14,400/- Part of acquired land. P11 29.11.88 86 Sq.Y. 90,000/- 1046.00 550'</TAB>