VENKATACHALA - (1.) THESE appeals arise from a common judgment and separate decrees dated 27/08/1975 made by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, whereby R.F.A.'s Nos. 76, 77 and 78 of 1965 filed by the claimants seeking enhanced compensation for their acquired lands were partly allowed, and R. F. A.'s Nos. 68, 69 and 70 of 1965 of the State of Haryana seeking reduction in the compensation awarded to the claimants for their acquired lands were dismissed.
(2.) CIVIL Appeals Nos. 369-371 of 1976 are not filed by the State of Haryana but are filed by Messrs. Printers House Pvt. Ltd., a company for whose benefit the lands were acquired and in them reduction in the amount of compensation awarded by the High Court, is sought. CIVIL Appeals Nos. 946-948 of 1977 are that of the claimants and in them further enhanced compensation for the acquired lands is sought from the State and the company for whose benefit the State acquired the lands. Material facts which have given rise to these appeals lie in a narrow compass: i) Certain lands situated in the Village Ranhera, Tehsil Ballabhgarh, District Gurgaon (Haryana), abutting Delhi-Mathura Road (G. T. Road) were needed by Messrs. Printers House Pvt. Ltd., hereinafter referred to as 'the Company', to set up its factory for the manufacture of printing machinery. A request was made by the Company to the Punjab Government to acquire the said lands, for its benefit. The Punjab Government, which conceded to the request of the Company, by a preliminary notification under S. 4(l) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', published in the Punjab Gazette of 7/04/1961, proposed the acquisition of the said lands. Those lands measuring about 12 acres 3 kanals 4 marlas, comprised of 8 kanals 6 marlas (5020.50 sq. yds.) and 1 kanal 19 marlas (1179.75 sq. yds.) of lands owned by Mst. Saiyadan', 9 kanals 2 marlas (5505.50 sq. yds.) and 6 kanals 15 marlas (4083.75 sq. yds.) of lands owned by Messrs Cold Storage and Food Products and 73 kanals 2 marlas (44225.50 sq. yds.) of lands owned by the Masjid of Village Ranhera. The possession of the said lands was taken over from their owners by the Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Land Acquisition Collector, hereinafter referred to as 'the L.A.C.', acting under Section 17 of the Act. Notices under S. 9 of the Act were, thereafter, issued by the L.A.C. to the owners of the said lands calling upon them to prefer claims for compensation. The owners, responding to the said notices, preferred their claims before the L.A.C., seeking determination of the market-value of the acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 10 per sq. yard. ii) The L. A. C., by his common award dated 16/08/1961 made under Section 12 of the Act, determined the market-value of certain acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 3,600 per acre and other acquired lands at the rate of Rs. 1,600.00 per, acre. He awarded 15 per cent solatium on the market-value of the acquired lands. He also awarded interest at 4 per cent per annum on the amount of compensation payable to the claimants for their acquired lands from the date of taking their possession until the date of his award. iii) Since the claimants did not accept the said award of the L.A.C., they made applications to him under S. 18 of the Act for referring their cases to the Civil Court for granting higher amounts of compensation for their acquired lands. The L.A.C., accordingly, sent three References to the Court of Additional District Judge-cum-Land Acquisition Judge, hereinafter referred to as 'the Reference Court', for determination of the just amount of compensation awardable to each of the claimants for the concerned acquired land. iv) The Reference Court, on consideration of the evidence adduced before it by the claimants on one side and the State and the Company on the other side, made a common award and separate decrees dated 13/10/1964 determining the market-value of 8 kanals and 6 marlas of the acquired land of Mst. Saiyadan comprised in Killa No. 13 / 2 at Rs. 6,000.00 - an acre and of I kanal and 19 marlas of acquired land of the same claimant comprised in the same Killa at Rs. 4,800.00 - an acre, By the same common award, it determined the market-value of 9 kanals 2 marlas of the acquired land of Messrs Cold Storage and Food Products comprised in Killas Nos. 11, and 12 at Rs. 6,000.00 - an acre and of 6 kanals and 15 marlas of the acquired land of the same claimant comprised in Killa Nos. 21 and 22 at the rate of Rs. 4,800.00 an acre. Besides, it determined the market-value of 73 kanals and 2 marlas of the acquired land of the Masjid in Village Ranhera at the rate of Rs. 4,800.00 an acre. In addition, it awarded solatium at 15 per cent on the enhanced amount of market-value of the acquired lands and interest at 4 per cent per annum on the enhanced compensation of the acquired lands from the date of taking their possession until the date of payment or deposit of the amount of compensation. v) However, the claimants as well as the State, who were dissatisfied with the common award and separate decrees of the Reference Court, preferred appeals therefrom in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, as adverted to by us already. vi) The said appeals before the High Court were heard by a Division Bench comprised of Mr. Justice S. S. Sandhawalia and Mr. Justice Man Mohan Singh Gujral. As the said Judges rendered differing judgments on the amount of compensation awardable to the claimants for their acquired lands, the learned Chief Justice of the High Court placed the appeals for hearing before a third Judge, Mr. Justice Bhopinder Singh Dhillon. That learned Judge, by his Judgment dated 27/08/1975, since rendered a judgment concurring with the judgment of Mr. Justice Man Mohan Singh Gujral determining the market-value of almost all the acquired lands at an uniform rate of Rs. 3 / - per sq. yd., the appeals of the claimants were partly allowed and the appeals of the State were dismissed, as already adverted to. Although the State did not prefer any appeal against the said judgment, the Company for whose benefit the lands were acquired, preferred three Civil Appeals in this Court. So also, the claimants preferred three Civil Appeals in this Court against the very judgment of the High Court and they are in the nature of cross-appeals. The Civil Appeals which, therefore, require our consideration, are those directed against the judgments of the High Court rendered by Mr. Justice Bhopinder Singh Dhillon and Mr. Justice Man Mohan Singh Gujral. The oral arguments of learned counsel appearing for the opposing parties in the Civil Appeals were heard. The written submissions filed by respective learned counsel are also seen.
(3.) FROM the oral arguments heard and the written submissions seen, we find that for a proper disposal of the said appeals, consideration and decision is necessary on the following points: 1. Did the High Court apply the correct principle of valuation of land, in proceeding to determine the market-value of separate plots of acquired lands of the three claimants, with differing features at an uniform rate per unit measure? 2. Did the High Court apply the correct principle of valuation of land in determining the market-value of the acquired plots of land by fixing their unit rate by averaging the market value fetched for different lands under sale deeds and previous awards? 3. If the said two principles of valuation of acquired lands applied by the High Court for determining the market-value of different plots of the acquired lands, were not correct, can such determination of market-value be sustained? If not, is it necessary for this Court to determine the market-value of each plot of the acquired lands and if so, at what rate? We shall now consider and decide the said points in their serial order. Point - 1 : 6A. If the amount of compensation awardable for the lands acquired under the Act is required to be determined by a Civil Court, such amount of compensation has to be determined by taking into consideration the market-value of the lands on the date of publication in Government Gazette, of the preliminary Notification under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Act, as is envisaged under the First Clause of sub-section (1) of Section 23 of the Act admits of no controversy. Such market value of the acquired land which has to be determined by the Courts ought to be the price which a willing vendor of the land might reasonably expect to obtain from a willing purchaser, has been a well accepted principle of valuation of acquired lands, eversince that that principle was expounded by the Privy Council in the case of Vyricherala Narayana Gajapatiraju Bahadur Garu v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Vizagapatnam, AIR 1939 PC 98 known as 'Chemudu case'. In fact, this Court has approved the correctness of that principle by stating that the market value means the price that a willing purchaser would pay to the willing seller for a property, having due regard to its existing condition, with all its existing advantages and its potential possibilities when laid out in the most advantageous manner excluding any advantage due to the carrying out of the scheme for which the property is compulsorily acquired vide : Raghubans Narain v. U. V. Govt., AIR 1967 SC 465; Prithvi Raj Taneja v. State of M.P., (1977) 1 SCC 684: (AIR 1977 SC 1560). ;