LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR Vs. JAI KARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these appeals arising out of a single Notification dated 26.06.1996, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, are being disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) IT is stated on behalf of the parties that these matters are covered by a common judgment dated 29.03.2010 of this Court in RFA No. 59 of 2003 and the batch matters, titled The Land Acquisition Collector V/s. Dhian Singh etc. etc., reported in Latest HLJ 2010 (HP) 589, arising out of the acquisition proceedings for the same public purpose, namely, 'construction of office building of the Sub Divisional Officer, Civil, Jawali and the accommodation for Govt. officials falling under the jurisdiction of Sub Division, Jawali, Distt. Kangra ', text whereof is as under: All these appeals being connected matters arising out of single award dated 18.10.1996, are being disposed of by this common judgment. A big chunk of land measuring 24607 hects., which is equal to 64 kanals, came to be acquired for a public purpose namely 'construction of office building of the Sub Divisional Officer, Civil, Jawali and the accommodation for Govt. officials falling under the jurisdiction of Sub Division, Jawali, Distt. Kangra '. The requisite notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act '), was issued on 22.6.1996. The Collector awarded compensation for the acquired land as Under: Class of landArea Approved price.Per Hect.Per Kanal 1.Barani Awal 0 -17 -63 Hect.Market value of land for1995 -96,is Rs.763 -54 per paisa of the land revenue4,04,676/ -15,540/ - 2. Barani -Doem 0 -50 -07 Hect. -2,59,604/ -9,969/ - 3.Kharetar 1 -78 -37 -1,33,620/ -5,130/ - Not being satisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, the Petitioner and other interested persons sought reference under Section 18 of the Act. The learned Reference Court assessed the market value of the acquired land at the flat rate of Rs. 20,000/per kanal. The present appeals are at the instance of the Land Acquisition Collector. The acquired land is situate in Tika Kehrian, Mauza Jawali. The very purpose for which the land has been acquired, that is, 'construction of office building of the Sub Divisional Officer, Civil, Jawali and the accommodation for Govt. officials falling under the jurisdiction of Sub Division, Jawali, Distt. Kangra ', would go to suggest that though the acquired land is situate in Tika Kehrian, the said Tika is in essence extension of Tika Jawali. This inference is further fortified from the evidence on record, particularly the statements of PW1, Shri Kuldip and PW2, Shri Roshan Singh. Even the witnesses examined on behalf of the Land Acquisition Collector, namely, RW1, Shri Uttam Chand, Patwari and RW2, Shri Tarlok Chand, Registration Clerk, have admitted this position. It being so, it can be safely concluded that both the Tikas Kehrian and Jawali of Mauza Jawali, form part of Sub Divisional town of Jawali. Whereas, the Petitioner had relied upon sale instance Ex.P1, dated 16.7.1990, whereby, about 5 marlas of land situate in Tika Jawali, was sold for Rs. 11000/, that is, @ Rs. 44,000/per kanal. To the contrary, reliance on the other side was placed on sale instances Ex. RW2/A to Ex.RW2/E. As per sale deed Ex.RW2/A, dated 25.6.1994, land measuring 00387 hects. or say one kanal was sold at Rs. 11,000/.In sale instance Ex.RW2/B, dated 14.11.1996, land measuring 00288 hects, which is equal to about 15 marlas was sold for Rs. 12,000/, that is, @ Rs. 16,000/per kanal. The third sale instance represented by sale deed Ex.RW2/C, dated 11.7.1996, goes to show that land measuring 00472 hects., which is equal to one kanal and five marlas, was sold for Rs. 16,500/or say at the rate of Rs. 13,000/per kanal approximately. The next sale instance Ex.RW2/D is in respect of land measuring 00410 hects. or say one kanal and 1 1/2 marla, which was sold for Rs. 6500/or say @ Rs. 6200/per kanal approximately. The last exemplar Ex. RW2/E relates to sale of land measuring 00824 hects, which is equal to two kanal and 3 1/2 marlas, for Rs. 23,303/, the rate per kanal being Rs. 10,840/. The average rate per kanal on the basis of sale instances Ex.RW2/ A to Ex.RW2/E, relied upon on behalf of the Land Acquisition Collector, comes to Rs. 11,408/ (11000+16000+13000+6200+10840 = 57040 divided by 5 = 11408). In view of the above, it is apparent that a small plot of land measuring about five marlas was sold vide sale deed Ex.P1, relied upon on behalf of the Petitioner(s). This sale had taken place on 16.7.1990, that is, about six years prior to the acquisition proceedings under reference. This sale relates to Tika Jawali. It can be safely inferred that during this period of six years the land prices in Tika Jawali must have escalated considerably. However, even if the price of land represented by sale deed Ex.P1, is discounted by 50% taking into consideration the smallness of the plot the sale therein as compared to the large extent of the acquired land, the rate per kanal would come to Rs.22,000/, even without taking into consideration escalation of land prices during the intervening period. As already noticed, the average sale price represented by sale instances Ex.RW2/A to Ex.RW2/E, which relates to the period from 25.6.1994 to 19.11.1996, comes to Rs. 11,408/per kanal. Now by taking into consideration the fact that Tika Kehrian and Tika Jawali form part of the Sub Divisional town of Jawali, if the average sale price represented by sale deeds Ex.RW2/A to Ex.RW2/E, that is, Rs. 10840/, is further averaged visàvis the price of land per kanal represented by sale deed Ex.P1, that is, Rs. 44000/per kanal, the figure that would be available is Rs. 27,704/, which again is higher than the average discounted price of small plot sold vide sale deed Ex.P1, that is , Rs. 22,000/per kanal. The above discussion brings me to hold that by looking from any angle, the market value of the acquired land in any case comes to be more than what has been awarded by the Collector or by the learned Reference Court. It is by now settled preposition of law that if land is acquired for a particular purpose, such as, construction of buildings etc. as in the present case, the very classification of the acquired land, looses its very significance. It being so, the market value of the acquired land is required to be assessed at a flat rate. In view of what has been said hereinabove, there is no need for any interference with the impugned award dated 18.1.2002, at the hands of this Court. Consequently, all the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.

(3.) LET a duly authenticated copy of this judgment be placed on the records of RFA No. 72 of 2003.