- (1.) Though the respondents have been served none appeared on behalf of them. The appeal arises against the judgment of the division bench of the High court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissing the LPA No. 380 of 1977 dated 21/12/1977. The notification under Section 4 of the Land acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the 'act') was published on 23/4/1963 acquiring a total extent of 19 acres, 5 kanals and 3 marlas consisting the land situated in Khasra Nos. 29/21/2 (3 marlas) , 29/22/2 (12 marlas) , 29/23/1 (7 marlas) and 34/1/2 (7 marlas) and 32/1/2 (4 kanals 7 marlas) in Village Dera for establishing an Agricultural Market Committee. The Land Acquisition Collector in his award dated 12/10/1965 determined the market value of the land (Chahi) at the rate between Rs. 2,250. 00 to Rs. 3,000. 00 per acre and also total recompensation awarded at a sum of Rs. 2,875. 00. On reference under Section 18 of the Act, the district Judge enhanced the market value to Rs. 400. 00 per maria as claimed by the respondent in his reference applications under Section 18.
(2.) Dissatisfied therewith the appellant filed an RFA No. 193 of 1967 in the punjab and Haryana High court. But the learned Single Judge dismissed the same by judgment dated 2/9/1975 and affirmed the findings of the District judge. Thereafter the appellant which would work out at the rate of Rs. 625. 00 per maria and after allowing deduction the market value 9 comes to Rs. 400. 00 per maria. The contention of Shri Ashri, the learned counsel for the appellant, is that the principle adopted by the District court is erroneous and we find that the contention is well-founded. It is se that the witness stated in the evidence that he purchased the open land for Rs. 10,000. 00 but the District judge found that it was purchased with the construction standing thereon but debris. It is not a case of the respondent. The assumption appears to be based only on surmise and is unwarranted. A willing vendor would not offer to sell theland and building as debris unless there is specific evidence to that effect. As willing vendee, the respondent had purchased with an expectation that the price paid to the land together with the building standing thereon would constitute proper consideration for which he willingly paid the same. Even then also it is only for the purpose of establishing saw mill. Obviously he had his special advantages for purchasing that property. Accordingly, that would not furnish the true basis to determine the market value of the land in question. In particular the total extent of 19 acres is sought to be acquired for the purpose of establishing market yard. It is seen that admittedly the respondent appellant himself purchased 3 bighas 15 biswas practically more than 3/4th of an acre for a sum of Rs. 12,000. 00 and odd which would work out at the rate of Rs. 120. 00 per maria in the year 1959. Three years have passed by unobviously when the appellant has purchased the property in 1959 and after a gap of 3 to 4 years, as on the date of acquisition we are of the considered view that at least Rs. 160. 00 per maria would represent the proper market value. Taking this factor into consideration we are of the considered opinion that the High court has grievously committed error in not interfering with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector under Section 18 and District Judge also committed grievous error in awarding what has been asked for by the respondent. As seen earlier respondent himself claimed maximum of Rs. 400. 00 per maria and the District Judge has reckoned irrelevant factor in the circumstances and ignored the relevant factors in determining the market value. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The award of the Land acquisition court, namely, the District court at Karnal under Section 18 is set aside and the market value is fixed at Rs. 160. 00 per maria in other words rs 25,600 per acre. The respondents are entitled to the solatium at the rate of 15% on the enhanced market value and interest at 6% thereon. No costs.;