Telu & Ors. v. State of Haryana

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present:- Mr. R. K. Gupta, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. D. D. Gupta, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. RAJESH BINDAL, J The land owners are in appeal before this Court against the award of the learned court below passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, `the Act') seeking enhancement in compensation for the acquired land. Briefly, the facts of the case are that land measuring 6 kanals 8 marlas situated in village Bhurain, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind, was acquired by the State of Haryana vide notification dated 14.11.1978 issued under Section 4 of the Act for construction of road from village Pillukhera to village Dharoli. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, `the Collector') assessed the market value of the acquired nehri land @ ` 16,000/- per acre. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the claimants filed objections, which were referred to learned Additional District Judge, Jind. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the learned court below vide award dated 12.12.1992 assessed the compensation at ` 22,500/- per acre. It is this award which is impugned in the present appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the acquired land which is a small piece of land measuring 6 kanals 8 marlas was located close to the abadi area. The acquisition was for the purpose of construction of road from the office of market committee to the mandi. Though the learned court below rightly placed reliance upon sale-deed, Ex. P-1, registered on 29.7.1977 whereby 4 marlas of land was sold out of khasra no. 398, part of which was acquired but there was error in calculation of the compensation as the consideration paid therein was mentioned as per acre though the value comes out for one kanal. The prayer was determination of compensation by correcting the error. R.F.A. No.797 of 1993 -2- On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that there is no site plan produced on record to show the location of the acquired land viz-a- viz the sale-deed relied upon by the landowners. Sale-deeds, Ex. R-1 and Ex. R-2, produced on record by the State clearly justified the award of the Collector. Reliance on sale-deed, Ex. P-1, as such was not denied but the submission was that the same being for a small piece of land, a reasonable cut be applied while assessing the value of the acquired land. The error of calculation as is mentioned in the impugned award was not disputed as such. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. As far as reliance of sale-deed, Ex. P-1, is concerned, in my opinion, the same would be the most appropriate. It is forming part of khasra no. 398 out of which small portion of land was acquired. It is mentioned in the sale-deed, Ex. P-1, that the land pertaining thereto is located on a road meaning thereby that part of land pertaining to khasra no. 398 was already abutting the road. The acquisition in the present case was for connecting the mandi from the office. The area in the vicinity must be developed as lot of commercial activities exit close to the mandi. A perusal of impugned award shows that there is an error in mentioning consideration paid in the Ex. P-1 vide which 4 marlas of land was sold for a sum of ` 4,500/-. The value of one kanal comes out to ` 22,500/- and for one acre comes to ` 1,80,000/-. The learned court below though relied upon the aforesaid sale-deed but calculated the consideration paid in the aforesaid sale-deed as ` 22,500/- per acre, which was erroneous. The genuineness of aforesaid sale- deed as such cannot be doubted for the reason that it was registered one year four months prior to the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. Once the reliance on the sale-deed as such was not disputed and there is apparent error in the calculation made by the learned court below, I do not find any reason to discard the same and only propose to correct the error made in the calculation and assessed the value of the acquired land @ ` 22,500/- per kanal and not per acre as was the error in the calculation made by the learned court below. The appellants shall also be entitled to all statutory benefits available under the Act. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a recent judgment in Civil Appeal No. 6515 of 2009 Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation vs Pran Sukh and others decided on 17.8.2010, to ensure that the landowners are not fleeced by the middleman in the process of disbursement of enhanced compensation, issued certain directions. I deem it appropriate to issue the same directions in the present set of appeals as well. The same are as under:- “With a view to ensure that the land owners are R.F.A. No.797 of 1993 -3- not fleeced by the middleman, we deem it proper to issue following further directions: (i) The Land Acquisition Collector shall depute officers subordinate to him now below the rank of Naib Tehsildar, who shall get in touch with all the land owners and/or their legal representatives and inform them about their entitlement and right to receive enhanced compensation. (ii) The concerned officers shall also instruct the land owners and/or their legal representatives to open saving bank account in case they already do not have such account. (iii) The bank account numbers of the land owners should be given to the Land Acquisition Collector within three months. (iv) The Land Acquisition Collector shall deposit the cheques of compensation in the bank accounts of the land owners.” The impugned award of the learned court below is modified to the extent mentioned above. The appeal stands disposed of.

29.9.2010. vs. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge