SURINDER SINGH Vs. UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With an intention to develop residential-cum-commercial complex in pocket No. 4 of the Mani Majra Complex, Administration of Union Territory, Chandigarh, issued the notification under Sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act on 25.5.1989 intending to acquire 39.27 acres of land in the revenue estate of village Mani Majra. The Administration had taken possession of the said area and the learned Land Acquisition Collector vide his award No. 413 LAO dated 5.1.1990 awarded the compensation to the claimants at the rate of Rs. 1,65,400.00 per acre in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The claimants were dis- satisfied with the amount of compensation awarded to them and thus, they preferred references under Sec. 18 of the Act. The learned Land Acquisition Collector referred 17 references of the claimants for determination in accordance with law. The learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh vide his judgment dated 30.3.1998 enhanced the compensation in favour of the claimants to the extent of Rs. 3,87,200.00 per acre. The learned Additional District Judge vide this common judgment answered all the 32 references and the claimants still claiming a higher compensation have impugned the judgment of the learned District Judge dated 30.3.1998 in these regular first appeals. While the Union Territory of Chandigarh Administration considered it appropriate to impugn the same very judgment on the ground that enhancement awarded to the claimants was unreasonable and prayed for restoration of the Collector's award.

(2.) After a period of less than a month from the previous notification dated 25.5.1989, Union Territory Administration, Chandigarh issued another notification under Sec. 4 of the Act on 12.6.1989. Vide the second notification the Administration intended to acquire 16.86 acres of land in the revenue estate of village Mani Majra for further extension of Indira colony. The possession of the land was taken by the Administration. The Land Acquisition Collector on the basis of the second notification awarded to the claimants sum of Rs. 1,65,400.00 per annum as compensation payble to the other words, he maintained the/same amount which acquisition the previous notification.

(3.) The claimants were again dis-satisfied by the amount awarded to them by the Collector and number of claimants preferred references under Sec. 18 of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector made references in 17 cases. All these 17 references were disposed of by the learned Additional District Judge by a common judgment and award dated 2.3.1998 awarding a sum of Rs. 2,80,000.00 per acre to the claimants. The award in the second notification was pronounced prior in time to the award in the first notification. The claimants appear to have accepted the said amount as no appeal has been listed before this Court against the said judgment preferred by the claimants. The Union Territory Administration has, therefore, challenged the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge praying that the amount of Rs. 2,80,000.00 per acre awarded to the claimants was also excessive and should be reduced. They preferred restoration of Collector's award in this case also. There are 17 appeals filed by the Union Territory Administration.