QAZI ABDUL SALAM Vs. COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION, SRINAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AN extent of land measuring 16 kanals and 6 marlas included in Survey Nos. 389, 390 and 391 belonging to the appellant was acquired vide preliminary notification issued under section 4 on 14 -1 -1965 and after making declaration under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act on 13 -3 -1965. The extent of land is situated in Zoonimar, Tehsil Khas. The Collector gave an award and an amount of Rs. 29,225.24 was fixed as compensation in favour of the appellant which included the jabrana at the rate of 15%.

(2.) THE award not being acceptable to the appellant, the matter was taken to the Additional District Judge in reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The learned Additional District Judge enhanced the amount of compensation to Rs. 46,825/ - including jabrana. He arrived at this amount of compensation by calculating the price of the land at the rate of Rs. 2500/ - per kanal. The appellant not being satisfied with this increase in compensation has come up in appeal before this court alleging that the amount awarded as compensation was ridiculously small. His contention was that the compensation should be calculated at the rate of Rs. 6.000/ - per kanal.

(3.) WE have been taken through the evidence produced in the trial court by both sides. We have examined various instruments of sale which have been produced by or at the instance of the appellant. The documentary evidence produced by the appellant in the trial could consists of copies of sale deeds executed by Abdul Rehman resident of Wazapora, Ahmad Dar resident of Zoonimar, Mohd Dar resident of Shri Bhat, Mst. Sarwa Banu resident of Reitengh, Srinagar and Hassan Akhoon R/O Nabdipora. On a scrutiny of these instruments it is found that, while the documents executed by Abdul Rehman, Ahmad Dar and Mst. Sarwa Banu pertain to the sales that had taken place after the date of notification issued in the instant case under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, the documents concerning the sales effected by Mohd Dar and Hassan Akhoon pertained to a period within three years before acquisition of land under reference. The sale deed of Abdul Rehman according to which 1 kanal and 10 marlas of land situated in Zoonimar, has been sold for Rs. 7.500/ -, has been executed on 27 -10 -1966, i.e. more than a year after the issue of declaration under section 6 was made with regard to land in question. The sale deed of Ahmad Dar has been executed on 21 -10 -1967, about two years after the relevant date. Similarly the sale deed executed by Sarwa Banu is dated 3 -5 -1966. This transaction has also taken place after the notification under section 6 issued in the instant case. Apparently all these sale deeds may not provide a just basis for ascertaining the real or approximately real market value of the land acquired in this case as these sales pertain to a period far remote from the date of the notification under section 6 in this case, as under section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act the market value at the time of the issue of such notification was to be taken into consideration for fixing the amount of compensation. These documents, therefore, are to be excluded from consideration for fixing the approximate or the likely value of the land in dispute. For arriving at a just and reasonable market value only such of the sales may fruitfully be considered as have taken place before the relevant date i.e. 13 -3 -1965, the date of the declaration under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act. There are two such documents available on the file of this case; one was that of Mohd Dar which has been executed on 21 -11 -1963. According to this sale deed an extent of 3 kanals 7 marlas of land situated in Zoonimar has been sold for Rs. 14,000/ -, By virtue of another document, Hassan Akhoon has sold a piece of land measuring 161/2 marlas situated in Zoonimar for Rs. 3,000/ - and the sale deed has been executed on 3 -5 -1962. These two sale deeds may provide a basis for ascertaining the approximate market value of the land in dispute at the time of its acquisition as both these sale deeds pertain to a time only 3/4 years before the date of notification under section in the instant case and were thus approximate in time and place. In addition to this documentary evidence the appellant has also led oral evidence in the trial court which consists of among others, a clerk from the Deputy Commissioners office, as estate broker and a lesee of the orchard. The gist of their evidence was that the land in question was situated on general road, was an orchard and was fenced by a barbed wire. It has also been brought on record that the annual income derived by the appellant from the orchard was Rs. 1250/ -. According to the broker witness the price of the land per kanal in that area in 1965 was not less than Rs. 10,000/ -, He has however failed to give any specific instance wherein the sale had taken place at a price of Rs. 10,000/ - per kanal. The clerk witness of the appellant has testified that in 1962 some pieces of land were acquired in Zoonimar (Nowshehra) at the rate of paisa 75 per sq. ft. but according to him these small pieces of land were acquired for purposes of the widening of the road. Naturally all these small pieces of land consisted of frontal portions of different estates situated on main roads and as such no parallel can be usefully drawn with the acquisition at hand. No documentary evidence has been led to establish the annual income derived from the orchard and as such the testimony of the lessee could not be relied upon in this regard.