SHYAM LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In pursuance of notification published in the official gazette dated November 14, 1980 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short 'the Act'), land measuring 80 Kanals 9 Marlas situated within the revenue estate of village Silokhra, Tehsil and District Gurgaon was acquired for a public purpose, namely, expansion and development of Haryana Welfare Centre for Deaf and Dumb, Gurgaon. The Land Acquisition Collector vide his award dated July 30, 1982, awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 40,000/- per acre on the uniform rate. On reference under Section 18 of the Act having been made, the learned Additional District Judge assessed the market value of the acquired land on the date of the notification at the rate of Rs. 25/- per sq. yard. The appellant-claiments have preferred Regular First Appeal No. 427 of 1985 whereas Raghbar Dayal-respondent No. 2 has filed cross-objections No. 3/C.I of 1989. By this judgment, both the appeal and the cross-objections would be disposed of as they arise out of a common award of the learned Additional District Judge.

(2.) The Additional District Judge while assessing the value of the acquire it land on the date of acquisition has relied upon a judgment rendered by G.C. Mital, J. of this Court on August 29, 1979 in the case of Kirpa Ram and others v. The State of Haryana. This Court, in the aforementioned case regarding acquisition of land of this very village acquired for this very purpose of buildings a Hostel for Deaf and Dumb Centre at Gurgaon, for which the notification was issued on October 2, 1973, assessed the market value of that land, at the rate of Rs. 17/- per sq. yard.

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel of the parties, I am of the view that the award of the learned Additional District Judge needs modification to the extent that the appellant-eleaimants are entitled to the enhancement to the tune of 84 per cent i.e. 12 per cent per year over and above the compensation allowed by this Court in Kirpa Ram's case . It has been held by this Court in Indir Singh v. State of Punjab,1988 PunLR 190 that the prices keep on increasing and a judicial notice of that increase can be taken. It has further been held that the intention of the Legislation to recognise the increase of 12 per cent in the price every year can be inferred. While applying the ratio of law laid down in Inder Singh's case I hold that the appellant-claimants are entitled to the increase in the compensation over and above the one which has been granted by the learned Additional District Judge by 84 per cent, i.e. 12 per cent per year for the time-lag between the two notifications, i.e. the one which was the subject matter of compensation in Kirpa Ram's cased and the one in the present case. When 84 per cent enhancement is given, the market value of the acquired land on the date of notification comes to Rs. 31. 28 per sq. yard.