THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR, H.P. HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER Vs. NARINDER SINGH & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since, common question of law and facts are involved in both the aforesaid appeals, hence, both are being disposed, of, by a common judgment.

(2.) The landowners' land, was, acquired for a public purpose, and, the Land Acquisition Collector concerned, determined vis-a-vis the acquired lands, hence, compensation amount, comprised, in a sum of Rs. 90,000/- per kanal, irrespective, of, the diverse classification, of, land(s), as, brought to acquisition. Being aggrieved therefrom, the landowners, through, the Collector concerned, hence, cast reference petition(s) under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, before, the learned Reference Court, and, the latter enhanced, the amount of compensation, to, a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- per kanal, irrespective, of, contra distinct classifications, of, lands as brought to acquisition. Being aggrieved therefrom, the appellant(s) herein preferred the instant appeal before this Court, for hence begetting its reversal.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing, for, the appellant(s) has with much vigour contended, before, this Court that, the apposite besides tangible materials rather hence begetting satiation, of, the twin principles, enjoined to be borne in mind, by the learned reference Court, while adjudging compensation amount, principles whereof are comprised in, (a) proximity in time angle, evinced, from the execution of apposite sale exemplars, bearing proximity in time vis-a-vis the issuance of the apposite notification, AND, (b) the lands borne in the apposite sale exemplars, also, holding proximity in location angle vis-a-vis the location of the lands, as, brought to acquisition, are hence rather borne, in sale exemplars, embodied in Ex.RW1/A, and, in Ex.RW1/B, (i) AND, he further contends, that the discarding of the aforesaid, renders the impugned award(s), to be, ingrained with an inherent legal frailty. The aforesaid submission is not amenable for acceptance, by this Court, given RW-1, who tendered the aforesaid sale exemplars, into evidence, rather not during the course, of, his examination-in-chief, hence making, any, apt candid voicings qua rather satiation(s) being meted, qua the afore referred twin principles. Reiteratedly, hence, no reliance was amenable, to be placed thereon.