RFA No. 3799 of 1998 · Punjab & Haryana High Court

Learned counsel for the appellant(s) further points out that since the acquisition in the present case was for the public purpose for construction of Palwas Minor, as such the appellant(s)- landowner(s) should have been awarded damages towards severance as well. ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT(S)-STATE OF HARYANA [7] On the other hand, learned counsel representing the respondent-State of Haryana submits that no interference is called for in the impugned award as the appellants-landowners were already granted suitable market price under the award passed by the LAC. He further points out that in the absence of any evidence available on record with respect to any loss caused to the appellant(s)- landowner(s), no damages towards severance were payable to them and thus, the appeals are liable to be dismissed. DISCUSSION AND REASONING [8] After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the paper-book / records, I find substance in the submission(s) made on behalf of the appellant(s)-landowner(s). DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.16 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:4)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:4)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:9)(cid:24)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:6)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:21)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:19)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:28)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -4- [9] Before proceeding in the matter, the relevant chart of the sale deeds produced by the appellants-landowners as well as by the respondent-State of Haryana in the tabulated form are extracted hereunder:- (i) Sale deeds produced by the appellants-landowners:- Exhibit P-7 Date of Sale Deed 19.12.1986 2 Kanals Area Sold Sale Price Village (Rs.) 27,500/- Bhiwani Lohar P-8

27.01.1987 2 Kanals 27,500/- Bhiwani Lohar P-9

19.03.1987 3 Kanals 41,250/- Bhiwani Lohar P-10

09.01.1987 2 Kanals 27,500/- Bhiwani Lohar P-11

19.03.1987 3 Kanals 16 Marlas 52,500/- Bhiwani Lohar P-12

13.01.1987 2 Kanals 27,500/- Bhiwani Lohar Total 14 Kanals 16 Marlas 2,03,750/- The average price per acre = Rs. 1,10,135/- (ii) Sale deeds produced by the respondent-State of Haryana Exhibit R-2 R-6 R-7 R-8 No. & Date of Sale Deed 1439 & 09.07.1986 604 & 28.05.1993 829 & 14.06.1993 543 & 21.05.1994 Kind of Soil Area Sold Tal Tal Tal Tal 7 Kanals 01 Marla 9 Kanals 11 Marla 8 Kanals 12 Kanals 03 Marla Total amount of sale deed Amount per acre (Rs.) 13,500/- 15,319/- 66,000/- 55,287/- 57,000/- 57,000/- 91,000/- 59917/- Total 1,87,523/- Average (1,87,523÷4 = 46,881/-) 46,881/- A perusal of the above shows that the sale instances, i.e. Exhibits R-6 to R-8 produced by the respondent-State of Haryana relate to the period post notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act in the case at hand and thus, need not be relied upon. Further, as per DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.16 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:4)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:4)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:9)(cid:24)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:6)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:21)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:19)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:28)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -5- sale instance dated 09.07.1986 (Exhibit R-2), the base price per acre comes to Rs.

15,319/- which is less than one-fourth of the market price assessed by the LAC and thus, apparently not being a bona fide or genuine sale transaction, has to be discarded. As regards the sale- deeds produced by the appellants-landowners in the form of Exhibits P-7 to P-12, the base price per acre is around Rs. 1,10,135/-. The acquisition in the present case relates to the revenue estate of Village Bhiwani Lohar and the sale instances Exhibits P-7 to P-12 also belong to the same revenue estate. [10] On a specific query, Sh. Satyawan, Patwari, Office of SDO, Bhiwani (East), Irrigation Department, Palwas, who is present in person, informs that the sale instances Exhibits P-7 to P-12 are at a distance of approximately 10 rectangles from the acquired land. In such situation, when the acquisition of land pertains to a revenue estate and not of any urban area, the exemplar sale deeds of land falling at a distance of merely 50 acres from the acquired land, need not be ignored and thus, are taken into consideration for the purpose of re-assessment of market value. [11] Further, the appellants-landowners also need to be awarded an appreciation at the rate of 10% per annum (in simple) over the base price per acre derived from the most recent sale exemplar dated 19.03.1987 (Exhibit P-11) upto the date of notification issued under Section 4 of the 1894 Act, i.e.

25.05.1992. [12] Moreover, considering the fact that the acquisition in the present case pertains to 3.14 acres of land and the sale exemplars (Exhibits P-7 to P-12) are for an area ranging from 2 Kanals to 3 DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.16 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:4)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:4)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:9)(cid:24)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:6)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:21)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:19)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:28)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -6- Kanals 16 Marlas, as such, no cut is required to be imposed towards smallness of area involved in the sale exemplar. [13] Furthermore, in the given facts and circumstances, no deduction towards the development cost needs to be applied as the acquisition proceedings were carried out for the public purpose of construction of Palwas Minor and the State did not suffer any loss of land nor even incur any cost towards providing of additional infrastructural amenities. [14] Accordingly, the market value of the land under present acquisition is re-assessed at the rate of Rs.1,67,405/- per acre, as per calculation below:- Description Average base price of the land (as per sale deeds Exhibits P-7 to P-12) Add: Appreciation @ 10% per annum (Rs.1,10,135 x 10/100 x 5) (from 19.03.1987 to 18.03.1992) Add: Appreciation @ 10% per annum (Rs.1,10,135 x 10/100 x 73/365) (from 19.03.1992 to 25.05.1992 = 73 days) Net Compensation Amount per acre (in Rs.) 1,10,135.00 55,067.50 1,65,202.50 2,202.70 1,67,405.20 1,67,405.00 (Round Off) [15] With respect to another plea raised on behalf of the appellant(s) regarding award of damages towards severance, it may be pointed out here that the acquisition has been for the public purpose of construction of Palwas Minor, which undoubtedly is going to bifurcate/divide the land by creating severance of their land-holdings.

Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court, the appellant(s)-landowner(s) are entitled for award of damages at the rate of 20% of the market value towards severance qua the DINESH KUMAR 2026.01.16 10:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:4)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:4)(cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:13)(cid:4)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:4)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:21)(cid:4)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:9)(cid:24)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:6)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:25)(cid:27)(cid:26)(cid:21)(cid:4)(cid:25)(cid:19)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:28)(cid:4) (cid:4) (cid:4) -7- leftover land-holdings subject to submitting/showing the proof before the learned Executing Court, as the severance is definitely going to cause loss to the potential value of their remaining land-holdings by causing inconvenience as regards irrigation facilities as well as passage etc.