MAZHAR ALI SHAH,K.K.GUPTA, JJ -
(1.) COLLECTOR , Land Acquisition, Udhampur, acquired land measuring 12 kanals belonging to the respondents herein for the construction of barracks ,etc. on the requisition made by the Commandant 35 BRTF, The
respondents being interested persons demanded compensation at the rate of
Rt. 40, 000 to Rs. 45000 per kanal, but the Collector, after considering
all the factors including the market value of the land, fixed the
compensation at the rate of Rs. 17, 000/ - per kanal He made a tentative
award accordingly and sent the same to the Revenue Minister for approval
but the Revenue Minister reduced the rate of compensation from Rs.
17,000/ - to Rs. 18, 000/ - per kanal and the collector thus made final award in accordance with the approval granted by the Revenue Minister.
The respondents herein aggrieved by this award, moved an application
before the Collector for making a reference to the District Judge, as
acceding to them, the rate of compensation assessed was not according to
the value of the land. The Collector accordingly made a reference to
District Judge, Udhampur, who, after obtaining objections from the
parties, framed the following issues :
I/ - Whether the compensation paid to the applicant is not in accordance with the market value ? If so, that was the market value at the time of the notification 7?.OPP. 2/ - Relief?
Both the parties led evidence and the learned District Judge, came
to the conclusion that market value of the land was Rs. 17,000/ -per kanal
and made award accordingly. The Collector, not satisfied with ibis
finding of the District Judge, has come up in appeal before this Court.
(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant record before us. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant
has argued that the Revenue Minister had rightly assessed the amount of
compensation at Rs. 13, 000/ - per kanal and there was no evidence
available with the court below to come to a different conclusion. Learned
counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has contended that the
Collector himself after considering all the factors available, assessed
the rate of compensation to be Rs. 17000/ - per kanal and made award
accordingly and now it does not lie in his mouth to come forward with a
plea that, in fact, the market value at that time was Rs. 13, 000/ - per
kanal. He has further argued that the Revenue Minister without making any
further enquiry and bearing the parties, passed an arbitrary order
assessing the rate of compensation at Rs. 13,000/ - per kanal which could
not be justified in any manner. We have considered these respective
contention raised by either side.
(3.) THE facts placed on record reveal that the Collector first of all obtained report of Tehsildar Udhampur in regard to the market value
of the land in question who, after verifying the facts repotted it to be
Rs. 23, 000/ - per kanal. The Collector, however did not agree with his
report and made independent enquiry and ultimately assessed the rate or
compensation at Rs 17, 000/ - per kanal. He made tentative award and
submitted the same to the Revenue Minister for approval who reduced the
rate of compensation to Rs. 13,000/ - per kanal. The admitted facts in the
case are that the land is situate just on the roadside and is also within
the limits of Town Area Committee of Udhampur. An industrial complex is
coming up nearby that land and as informed by learned counsel for the
respondents, which fact is not even controverted by the other side,
railway station is also proposed to be constructed in the near vicinity.
It cannot be denied that while fixing the compensation for a land
acquired, all potentialities of that land have to be taken into account
In case State Versus Mohd. Yasin reported in AIR 1982 J&K 23, a Division
Bench of this Court has taken a view that the owner of the land would be
within his rights to have the price assessed in reference to those
advantages which would give the land the maximum value and it is not only
the existing benefits derived from the land by the owner that have to be
taken into consideration but even possible benefits in the future have
also to be gone into and considered while fixing the compensation. Same
view has been taken by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in AIR 1984.
Sc 892 wherein it has been held that the potential value of the land trust be kept in view in fixing the compensation.
Before the District Judge, both the parties have produced, Jagan Nath. clerk of Deputy Commissioners Office, Udhampur, who deals in acquisition matters According to this witness, Tehsildar Udhampur, assessed the market value of the land at Rs. 2 000/ - per kanal, but the Collector cams to a different finding and fixed the market value of the land in question at Rs. 17, 000/ - per kanal L. Dhera Mal, one of the respondents herein, has appeared as a witness and he has justified the report of the Tehsilder to be correct while assessing the market value of the land in question Collector, Land Acquisition Udhampur, who is appellant in this case, has himself mentioned in his reference that after considering all the factors laid down in Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act location, size and site of the land under requisition he proposed the rate of compensation Rs. 17, 000/ - per kanal Learned District Judge has held this rate of compensation to have been rightly assessed and according to him also such was the market rate prevalent at that time. We think that the finding arrived at by the learned District Judge is correct in accordance with the facts and circumstances of the case and there is no reason to believe the Collector from resiling his earlier position.