Gram Panchayat Ishargarh v. State of Haryana & Anr.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate, for the landowners. Mr. Ashish Gupta, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Rajesh Bindal J. This order shall dispose of the aforesaid appeals and cross- objections, as the same arise out of common acquisition. The landowners have filed the appeals against the award of the learned court below passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act') seeking enhancement of compensation for the acquired land whereas by filing appeals and cross-objection the State of Haryana is seeking reduction in compensation. The facts have been extracted from RFA No. 924 of 1995. Briefly, the facts are that land situated in Village Ishargarh, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra was acquired vide notification under Section 4 of the Act dated 18.12.1984 published on 15.6.1985, for construction of road from G. T. Road to Kaulapur via Ishargarh. The Land Acquisition Collector (for short, “the Collector”) vide his award dated 30.8.1985 assessed the market value of the acquired land @ ` 36,000/- per acre for chahi and gair mumkin kinds of land and ` 17,952/- per acre for banjar kadeem kinds of land. Dissatisfied with the award of the Collector, the landowners filed objections which were referred to the learned Court below for consideration, who on the basis of evidence produced on record, determined the market value of the acquired land @ ` 65,000/- per acre. It is this award which is impugned in the present set of appeals by both the parties. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that while assessing the market value of the acquired land, the learned court below had ignored the evidence produced by the landowners. It was submitted that the acquired land is located near the national highway. The learned reference court has ignored the sale R. F. A. No. 924 of 1995 4 instances produced by the landowners in the form of Ex. P-3 to P-5, without giving any reasons. It was prayed that price of the acquired land be assessed while considering these sale-deeds, may be by applying a reasonable cut and the compensation for the acquired land be enhanced. On the other hand, learned State counsel submitted that the court below has wrongly considered sale-deeds, Ex. P-1 and Ex. P-6, while determining the market value of the acquired land and ignored the sale instances produced by the State in the form of sale-deeds, Ex. R-1 and Ex. R-2. In so far as Ex. P-3 to Ex. P-5 are concerned, the same are for small pieces of land, hence should not be considered. It was prayed that market value of the acquired land be determined after considering the evidence led by the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant referred record. There is no dispute regarding the location of the land.It was also not disputed that the road was laid in the year 1972 whereas the acquisition was carried out in the year 1985. The dispute is regarding the market value of the land. Both the parties led evidence in support of their claim. The sale instances produced by the landowners are as under:- Ex. No P-1 P-2 P-3 P-4 P-5 P-6 Ex. No R-1 R-2 Date sale-deed 11/03/85 14/06/85 30/04/84 08/05/85 14/06/85 23/11/84 Village Area Amount Amount per Ishargarh 1 bigha 11 biswas ` 20,000/- ` 65,000/- Ishargarh 4 bighas ` 48,000/- ` 58,626/- Ishargarh 3½ biswas ` 6,000/- ` 1,89,313/- Kohlapur 1 kanal ` 49,000/- ` 3,92,000/- Kohlapur 2 marlas ` 60,000/- ` 4,80,000/- Kohlapur 8 kanals ` 66,000/- ` 66,000/- The sale instances produced by the State are as under:- Date sale-deed 11/05/84 15/03/84 Village Area Amount Amount per Ishargarh 4 bighas ` 30,000/- ` 36,000/- Ishargarh 9 bighas 17 biswas ` 57,000/- ` 27,776/- As far as determination of fair value of the acquired land is concerned, in my view, two sale deeds Ex. P1 and Ex. P6, as are relied upon by the learned court below, are the best piece of evidence. The genuineness thereof cannot be doubted for the reason that those were registered well prior to the date of publication of notification under Section 4 of the Act which was published on

15.6.1985. Vide sale deed Ex. P1 dated 11.3.1985, 1 bighas 11 biswas of land was sold for a sum of Rs. 20,000/-. This part of the land is forming part of village R. F. A. No. 924 of 1995 5 Ishargarh. Another sale deed is Ex. P6 dated 23.11.1984, vide which 8 kanals of land was sold for a sum of Rs. 66,000/-. The land forming part of this sale deed is of adjoining village Kohlapur which comes later if proceeding from GT Road, as village Ishargarh comes first. The area, which has been dealt with in the aforesaid sale deeds cannot be said to be of small piece of land. Even otherwise the possession of land was taken by the State in the year 1971-72, when the road was laid. Considering the aforesaid facts, in my opinion, the award of the learned court below does not call for any interference, accordingly, all the appeals and cross-objections are dismissed.

19.7.2010 vs. ( Rajesh Bindal) Judge