The High Court
Case Details
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases Reserved On: 10.01.2025 Pronounced On: 27.01.2025 Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited Ajmer Singh and Another Versus ... Appellant(s) ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal. Present: Mr. Pritam Singh Saini, Advocate for the appellant (In RFA-3304-2005) and for the HSIIDC-respondent (In Other Connected Cases. Mr. Abhay Chauhan and Mr. J.K.Chauhan, Advocates for the appellant(s) (In RFA-2396-2004, RFA-2397-2004. RFA-2482-2004, RFA-2691-2004, RFA-2692-2004, RFA-88-2005, RFA-89-2005, RFA-90-2005, RFA-2437-2005 and RFA-2535-2005). Mr. M.K.Chauhan and Mr. Shoaib Khan, Advocates, for the respondent-landowners (In RFA-2281-2004, RFA-2282-2004, RFA-2283-2004, RFA-2284-2004, RFA-2285-2004, RFA-2286- 2004, RFA-2287-2004, RFA-2288-2004, RFA-2289-2004, RFA-2290-2004, RFA-2343-2004, RFA-2397-2004, RFA-2460- 2004, RFA-2478-2004, RFA-2924-2005 and RFA-2689-2004). Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Anil Kshetarpal, J. 1. 1.1 Introduction and Background While praying for the modification of the market value of the DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document acquired land assessed by the Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases 2 RC’), the landowners as well as the State for Haryana have filed this batch of 30 appeals, (the details whereof have been given at the foot of judgment). 1.2 The notification under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1894 Act”) and the awards passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as “the LAC”) as well as the Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as “the RC”) are common. The learned counsel representing the parties are ad idem that this batch of appeals can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment. In fact, all the reference petitions were consolidated and decided together by the RC. 1.3 The relevant particulars of the acquisition for the purpose of deciding this batch of appeals, in brief, are as under:- S.No. 1. 2. 3. DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Date Particulars 19.06.1992 Preliminary notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act was issued for developing Industrial Estate located in the Revenue Estate of Village Alipur, Tehsil Panchkula, District Ambala. 17.06.1993 Declaration under Section 6 of the 1894 Act was published with regard to land measuring the 103.17 acres 08.04.1994 Award No. I land, was announced while offering to pay at the rate of ₹1,60,000/- per acre for ₹1,20,000/- Chahi per acre for Barani land and ₹80,000/- per acre for land as Gair Mumkin market value of the acquired land to the landowners alongwith all Details -- Area of land – 103.17 acres. Purpose-Development Industrial Estate. of Award was announced only for 102.99 acres of land, which was the actual acquired land and 0.18 acres of land was left out, it being wrongly calculated.
Legal Reasoning
Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases 3 Details -- S.No. Date Particulars statutory benefits. 4. 30.07.2004 The RC assessed the market value at the rate of ₹2,40,000/- per acre for chahi land, ₹1,80,000/- per acre for barani land and ₹1,20,000/- per acre for land mumkin gair alongwith all statutory benefits payable under the 1894 Act. 2. 2.1 Brief facts of the Case Dissatisfied with the amount offered for the involuntary acquisition of the land by the LAC, on the applications filed by the landowners, the cases were referred to the RC. The landowners claimed that the acquired land abuts the State Highway connecting traffic of the States of Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and the adjoining abadi of village, residential, commercial and industrial establishments. 2.2 On the other hand, the State of Haryana, while filing the written statement has claimed that the LAC has offered to pay a reasonable, adequate and appropriate market value of the acquired land. 3. 3.1 Evidence Produced by the Respective Parties In the oral evidence, the landowners have examined the following witnesses:- Sr. No. 1. 2. 3. Name of the Witness PW.1 Sardul Singh PW.2 Ajaib Singh PW.3 Ajay Kumar 4. 5. PW.4 Kashmir Singh PW.5 Suresh Pal DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Particulars of the Witness Petitioner Petitioner Registry Clerk, Office of Sub Registrar, Panchkula Assistant Manager, HSIDC Landowner of the land adjacent to the acquired land Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases 4 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. PW.6 Labh Singh PW.7 Mirya Deen PW.8 Khalil Ahmad PW.9 Bata Khan PW.10 Khalil son of Kalu PW.11 Ram Niwas Petitioner Rent Controller Estate Officer, Punjab Wakf Boad, Ambala. Resident of village Billa Resident of village Billa Draftsman 3.2 In the documentary evidence, the landowners produced the following documents, apart from the sale deeds, a tabulated compilation whereof is in Para 4.5 of the judgment:- Sr. No. Exhibit Number Ex.P1 Ex.P2 Ex.P3 Ex.P4 Ex.P5 Ex.P6 Ex.P7 Ex.P8 Ex.P9 Ex.P10 Ex.P11 Ex.P12 Ex.P13 Ex.P14 Ex.P15 Ex.P16 Ex.P17 Ex.P18 Ex.P19 Ex.P20-22 Ex.P25 Ex.P26 Ex.P27 Ex.P28 Ex.P29 Ex.P30 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 27. Ex.P31 Description of the document Pass Book Rent Receipts Rent Receipts Rent Receipts Rent Receipts Rent Receipts Copy of Khasra Girdwari Copy of sale deed dated 28.05.1993 Copy of sale deed dated 26.04.1993 Copy of sale deed dated 01.06.1993 Copy of sale deed dated 31.05.1993 Copy of sale deed dated 10.05.1993 Copy of sale deed dated 08.04.1992 Copy of sale deed dated 29.08.1991 Copy of sale deed dated 24.03.1992 Copy of sale deed dated 28.11.1990 Site Plan Copy of Jamabandi Copy of Jamabandi for the year 1991-92 Kabuliat Nama Letter dated 03.01.1997 of PWB Letter dated 11.03.1997 of PWB Letter dated 22.04.1997 of PWB Letter dated 28.11.1996 of PWB Letter dated 09.04.1996 of PWB Copy of Gazette Notification dated 01.01.1990 Order dated 04.08.1994 Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases 5 Sr. No. Exhibit Number Ex.P32 Ex.P33 Ex.P34 28. 29. 30. Description of the document Copy of sale deed dated 30.11.1993 Site Plan Certified copy of award dated 12.12.1996 in LA cases 53 of 1996 3.3 On the other hand, the HSIIDC examined RW.1 Aneeraj Sharma, Accountant, L.A. Office, Panchkula State of Haryana, in the oral evidence, has examined RW.2 Sh.Satish Kumar Taneja. 3.4 In the documentary evidence, the HSIIDC has produced the following documentary evience:- Sr. No. Exhibit Number Ex.R1 Ex.R2 1. 2. Description of the document Copy of sale deed dated 19.10.1993 Copy of sale deed dated 13.09.1994 4. 4.1 Analysis of the Reasons Recorded by the RC From the pleadings of the parties, the RC culled out the following issues for adjudication:- “1) What was the market value of the suit land at the time of acquisition? OPP 2) To how much amount, the petitioners are entitled as compensation? OPP 3) Relief.” 4.2 The Reference Court has discarded the sale deeds Ex.P34 (with respect to parcel of land located in village Ramgarh), Ex.P16 (with respect to parcel of land located in village Barwala), Ex.P8, Ex.P9, Ex.P10, Ex.P11 and Ex.P32 (with respect to parcel of land located in village Billa). Subsequently, the market value of the acquired land was assessed while calculating the average of as many as six sale deeds Ex.P12, Ex.P13, DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases 6 Ex.P14, Ex.P15, Ex.R1 and Ex.R2 @ ₹2,48,000/- per acre. 5. 5.1 Discussion and Analysis of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel representing the parties. Heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length and with their able assistance perused the paper-book. Learned senior counsel representing the landowners has filed the written submission apart from the oral submissions. 5.2 At this stage, it will be appropriate to compile a list of sale deeds relied upon by the respective parties. Sr. No. Exhibit No. Dated Area of Amount Sale Consideation (In ₹) Name of Village Rate Per acre (In ₹) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. P13 P14 P15 P16 P12 P8 P9 P10 P11 P32 R1 R2 08.04.1992 4K-5M 29.08.1991 5K-11M 24.03.1992 28.11.1990 8K 4K 1,95,000 1,80,125 1,95,000 Alipur Alipur Alipur 3,67,059 2,59,640 1,95,000 3,00,000 Barwala 6,00,000 10.05.1993 1K-1M 45,000 Alipur 3,42,857 28.05.1993 0-8M 26.04.1993 2K-19M 01.06.1993 31.05.1993 1K-5M 1K-5M 30.11.1993 6M 19.10.1993 4K-13M 60,000 3,10,000 1,90,000 1,90,000 45,000 70,000 15.09.1994 7K-12M 1,50,000 Billa Billa Billa Billa Billa Alipur Alipur 12,00,000 8,40,678 12,16,000 12,16,000 12,16,000 1,20,480 1,57,920 5.3 On perusal of the lower Court’s record, it can be noticed that the land owners produced a copy of layout plan of the area showing the location of the land while identifying the location of the land represented by the various sale deeds. Though this sketch is not on a scale but distance between the acquired land and the parcels of land represented by the various DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document sale deeds particularly the sale instances Ex.P13, Ex.P14 and Ex.P15 have Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases 7 been specified as 60 meters. The acquired land is located in between the State Highway and the residential portion of village Alipur which is located on a road which goes to Sabilpur. Thus, the acquired land was abutting two roads; one leading to Sabilpur and abadi of Alipur, whereas the second on the State Highway. Though village Barwala is at some distance, however, the development in the area is evident. It has also been shown that there is a ITBP Training Centre in the area. 5.4 The sale instances Ex.P13, Ex.P14 and Ex.P15 are at a distance of 60 meters. When the Draftsman who prepared the sketch appeared in evidence, this fact was not disputed. The State of Haryana has not led any evidence to prove that the distance is not 60 meters but more. The sale instance Ex.P13 was executed 2 months and 11 days before the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act. Thus, this is the appropriate sale instance which can be relied upon. The sale instance Ex.P11 is approximately 10 months before the date of notification, whereas Ex.P15 is just one month before the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act. In the absence of evidence to the contrary proving that the sale instance is either not reflecting the correct market value or the location or the value of the land sold is different, the Court is expected to rely upon the sale instance reflecting the highest price because the property is being taken away due to involuntary acquisition. Hence, the sale instance Ex.P13 is considered appropriate. The argument of the learned counsel representing the landowners that the Court should rely upon the sale instance Ex. P14 lacks substance because the village Barwala is at a distance and in between DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document there is HMT Residential Colony and Grain Market which is located in Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases 8 Barwala. 5.5 It would be noted here that the acquisition is for developing the Industrial Estate at Barwala. Hence, Barwala is a major village in the area. However, that would not be sufficient to rely upon the sale deed of village Barwala. It is evident that there were a lot of residential and commercial activities in the area apart from the utilization of the land for agriculture purpose. 5.6 Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion, it can be concluded that the RC has erred in calculating the market value of the acquired land by taking average of the sale instances Ex. P12, Ex.P13 to Ex.P15, Ex.R1 and Ex.R2. 6. 6.1 Decision Consequently, the appeals filed by the landowners are allowed and those filed by the HSIIDC are dismissed. The landowners are held entitled to the market value of the acquired land @ ₹3,70,000/- per acre along with all the statutory benefits as per the amended 1894 Act, which now has been repealed. 6.2 The miscellaneous application(s) pending, if any, in all the
Decision
appeals shall stand disposed of. (Anil Kshetarpal) Judge January 27, 2025 “DK” Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Sr. No. Case No. Party’s Name DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1. 2. RFA-2278-2004 Avtar Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2281-2004 Surjit Kaur Vs. State Of Haryana Regular First Appeal No. 3304 of 2005 (O&M) And Other Connected Cases 9 Sr. No. Case No. Party’s Name 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. RFA-2282-2004 Gram Panchayat Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2283-2004 Ajmer Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2284-2004 Maghar Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2285-2004 Harpal Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2286-2004 Ajit Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2287-2004 Harpal Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2288-2004 Labh Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2289-2004 Sant Ram Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2290-2004 Ajaib Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2396-2004 Kishori Lal Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2460-2004 Goran Devi Vs. State Of Haryana & Others RFA-2478-2004 Surta Singh And Others Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2482-2004 Rati Ram Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2689-2004 Dharam Pal And Others Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2691-2004 Jarnail Singh Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2692-2004 Sowaran Singh And Others Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-56-2005 Vivek Mittal Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-88-2005 Buta Singh And Others Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-89-2005 Amar Singh And Others Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-90-2005 Ajaib Singh And Others Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2437-2005 Krishan And Others Vs. State Of Haryana RFA-2924-2005 Balwinder Singh & Others Vs. State Of Haryana & Others RFA-3303-2005 H S I D C Ltd. Vs. Balwinder Singh And Others RFA-3037-2006 Haryana. State Industrial Dev. Corp. Ltd. Vs. Rattan Singh Etc. RFA-3501-2006 Ram Kumar And Others Vs. State Of Haryana. RFA-3502-2006 Ram Kumar And Others Vs. State Of Haryana. RFA-3302-2005 Haryana State Ind. Dev. Corp. Ltd. Vs. Jarnail Singh And Another January 27, 2025 “DK” (Anil Kshetarpal) Judge DEEPAK KUMAR BHARDWAJ 2025.02.13 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document