SANDEEP SOMANI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present order shall dispose of 8 appeals i.e. (RFA Nos.4945, 3384, 3742, 3743, 3744, 4325 and 4946 of 2014 & RFA No.584 of 2017) filed both by the land owners and the State under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which are directed against the orders of the Reference Court, Karnal dated 11.12.2013. The Court has assessed the market value of the land @ Rs.33,51,813.76 per acre for the land which was situated on the G.T. Road upto 2 acres on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act dated 07.05.2007, while placing reliance upon Ex.P1 to Ex.P5, the sale deeds by taking out an average of Rs.83,79,534/-. A cut was imposed to the extent of 60% on account of the fact that the land had been developed and, therefore, the market value was, accordingly, assessed. For the other land beyond 2 acres, the value was fixed @ Rs.26,81,451/- per acre alongwith all statutory benefits.

(2.) The acquisition which was initiated on 07.05.2007 under Section 4 was followed by the notification under Section 6 dated 09.01.2008 by the State for expansion and systematic development of Tourist Complex, OASIS at Uchana, Karnal. The Land Acquisition Collector vide Award dated 14.07.2009 awarded compensation for 10 Acres 4 Kanal 7 Marlas by adopting the belting system @ Rs.15 lakhs per acre upto depth of 2 acres and 12 lakhs for the remaining land alongwith solatium and statutory benefits, which has accordingly been enhanced. In the reference petition compensation was sought at the rate of market value of Rs.2 crores per acre by taking the plea that the land was situated on the national highway and it had a great potential value and there were industrial and residential establishments in the vicinity. Reference was made to the Chandigarh City which was developed into a Modern City having residential and commercial activities and the Haveli Tourist Complex and Dhingra Mall situated nearby. It was claimed that the sale deeds of the adjoining land were being executed @ Rs.85 lakhs per acre.

(3.) The defence of the State was that the land under acquisition was part of the controlled area in terms of the provisions of the Punjab Act, 1963 and it was agricultural land and could not be utilized for any other purpose unless CLU is obtained. The award was stated to be adequate and legal.