JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) These are the appeals by way of special leave against
the judgment and order dated 13.07.2005 of the Division
Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh,
in Letters Patent Appeals determining the market value ofacquired land @ Rs.120/- per square yard (for short 'the
impugned judgment').
(2.) The facts relevant for deciding these appeals briefly are
that the National Fertilizers Limited (for short 'the NFL') is a
Government of India Undertaking engaged in the business
of manufacturing fertilizers and has a plant in Bhatinda in
the State of Punjab. To meet the requirement of dwelling
houses for the employees of NFL, the State of Punjab
acquired 29.68 acres of land in village Bhatinda by
notification dated 24.01.1983 issued under Section 4 of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act'). The District
Collector sent the market rates to the Land Acquisition
Collector for different classes of agricultural or revenue land
and these were for Nehri Rs.56,000/- per acre, for Barani
Rs. 23,000/- per acre and for Gair Mumkin Rs.23,000/-
per acre. The Land Acquisition Collector determined the
compensation at 50% above the rates sent by the District
Collector for each of the aforesaid classes of land in his
award dated 19.03.1986. Not satisfied with the award, the
landowners made a reference under Section 18 of the Act to
the civil court. Besides the State, NFL was impleaded as a
defendant in the reference. By order dated 29.04.1991, the
learned Additional District Judge determined the
compensation for all the three classes of land at a uniform
rate of Rs.32.50 per square yard after considering two
unregistered sale agreements (Exhibits A-X and A-Y) and
the order of the High Court in Sadhu Singh's case
determining the compensation for land acquired for
extension of the military cantonment in the year 1976. The
land owners challenged the order of the Additional District
Judge before the High Court in Regular First Appeals. The
State of Punjab and NFL also challenged the order of the
learned Additional District Judge before the High Court in
Regular First Appeals. The learned Single Judge of the High
Court, who heard the appeals, sustained the determination
of compensation made by the learned Additional District
Judge and dismissed the appeals by a common order dated
09.09.1994.
(3.) Aggrieved, the land owners as well as NFL challenged
the order dated 09.09.1994 of the learned Single Judge
before the Division Bench of the High Court in Letters
Patent Appeals. In the impugned judgment, the Division
Bench of the High Court held that as Exhibits A-X and A-Y
were unregistered and did not bear any date, these
documents could not be considered for determination of
compensation. The Division Bench also found from the site
plan that the military cantonment for which Sadhu Singh's
land was acquired was far away from the land acquired in
the present case. The Division Bench also found that the
land of Sadhu Singh was acquired for the military
cantonment in the year 1976 whereas the lands acquired in
the present case were included in the municipal limits of
Bhatinda city in 1977 and around the land acquired in the
present case, various colonies had come up in the
municipal limits of Bhatinda. The Division Bench further
found from the site plan that the land of Karam Singh which
had been acquired for a municipal park was much nearer to
the land of the land owners acquired in the present case.
The Division Bench, therefore, took the view in the
impugned judgment that the order passed by the High
Court in the case of Sadhu Singh for the land acquired for
military cantonment could not be preferred over the order of
the High Court passed in the case of Karam Singh for land
acquired for municipal park in the year 1983 for making the
assessment of market value of the land acquired in the
present case and determined Rs.120/- per square yard as
just and reasonable market value for the land acquired in
the present case and adopted the reasoning given in the
order dated 08.11.1989 of the High Court (Exhibit A-15) in
the case of Karam Singh (RFA No.906 of 1988).;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.