Decided on February 02,1999

DHANNA Respondents


M.Y.KAWOOSA, J. - (1.) THESE are two Civil 1st Miscellaneous Appeals bearing Nos: 53/91 and 54/91. These two appeals emanate from the land acquisition proceedings started by Collector Assistant Commissioner, Land Acquisition Ravi Tawi Irrigation Complex, Kathua, who acquired the suit land for the purpose of construction of Ravi Tawi Channel D -19 Vajpur on the requisition of Executive Engineer, Tawi Canal Construction Division. Land was acquired in pursuance of the notification under Section 4(1) of J&K Land Acquisition Act. After conducting the proceedings under the aforementioned Act, Collector passed an award assessing the compensation at Rs. 10,000 per kanal for Mehra -1 land and Rs. 20.000/ - per kanal for G. Mumkin land. Respondents not feeling satisfied with such rate of compensation, filed an application to the Collector requesting him to make a reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act to the District Judge for enhancing the award amount from Rs. 10,000/ - to Rs. 60,000/ - per Kanal of Land. Reference was made by the Collector on 28th October, 1988 to District Judge, Jammu, who transferred both cases to the Additional District Judge, Jammu. Additional District Judge, Jammu framed the following issues and recorded the evidence of the both sides and decided the references vide his judgment dated 5th March, 1991 by virtue of which said court enhanced the compensation from Rs. 10,000/ - to Rs. 30,000/ - per Kanal : - "Issue No.1 Whether the amount of compensation awarded by the Collector is in accordance with the market rate of the land prevalent at the time of the acquisition? OPD. Issue No.2 In case, issue no.1 is not proved, what was the market rate of the land in question at the time of its acquisition? OPP. Issue No.3 Relief."
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the above court order dated 5th March, 1991 the present appellant has come up with these aforementioned appeals.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties and I have gone through the record. The simple contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the respondents have failed to show the market value to the extent of enhanced amount prevailing in the year 1981. He has argued that the respondent has tried to show the market value of the land from the year 1984 -85 till date but he was bound to prove the enhanced rate of 1981 during which year the land has been acquired. I have gone through this contention. I think that the assertion made by the counsel for the appellant is not tenable. Before dealing with the point I feel that Issue No.1 has wrongly been drafted. Awarded amount was questioned by the respondent before the Collector so it was he who was to be burdened with to prove the market value of the land in question and the present appellant was to rebut the issue No.1. However, the whole evidence has been recorded from both the sides and wrongly drafting of the issue has not in any way prejudiced the parties. Even in the memo of appeal also it has not been pointed out. I have gone through the evidence. Some of the witness like P. W. -1 produced by the respondent has proved the rate of the land in Vijaypur as Rs. 1, 00,000/ - per kanal in 1985. Similarly P. W. -2 Dheru Ram also has proved the rate of land as Rs. 4,000/ - per marla in the year 1985 -87. This witness has stated that his land was acquired in 1985. According to P -W -5 the rate of the land in 1982 -83 was Rs. 2,500/ - Rs. 3,000/ - per marla. It means in between Rs.50, 000 - 60,000/ - per kanal. All these witnesses no doubt have not given the rate prevalent in year 1981 but have proved the rates from the year 1985 and onwards on the higher side. Learned District Judge, Jammu has rightly relied on the statement of P. W. -2 Hashim Ali who in unequivocal term has deposed that his land which was of Mumkin -2 quality was acquired by the Collector on 25th April, 1980 and was awarded Rs. 30,000/ - per Kanal. According to him the land of respondents is Mera -1 and is superior in quality and infront of the land of the witness. It according to the witness is near to road so it is worth more than Rs. 30,000/ - per kanal today. P. W. -4 Chajju Ram also has stated that he sold less than a Marla for Rs. 9,000/ -. P. W. -6 also has supported his case by deposing that the land in question in 1981 valued for Rs. 60,000/ - to Rs. 70,000/ - per Kanal.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.