Jaswant Singh, J. - (1.) This batch of 18 appeals Nos. 2394 to 2403 of 1972 and 2694, 2695, 2697 to 2700, 2703 and 2704 of 1972 by certificates granted under Article 133 (1) (a) of the Constitution which arise out of acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act No. 1 of 1894) (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and are directed against the common judgment dated January 3, 1969 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana shall be disposed of by this judgment. While the first group of ten appeals Nos. 2394 to 2403 of 1972 are by the erstwhile proprietors of land claiming enhancement of the compensation awarded to them by the High Court, the rest of the eight appeals are by the State of Punjab challenging the quantum of compensation as enhanced by the High Court.
(2.) It appears that a vast area of land measuring 832 kanals and 2 marlas (i.e. 416050 sq. yds.) situate in Amritsar (Urban) and village Tungbala, Amritsar, was acquired by the Government of Punjab for a public purpose viz. the expansion of the existing Medical College and allied institutions in the city of Amritsar. Whereas the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act in respect of the aforesaid area was issued on March 18, 1959, the notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on July 4, 1959. The Collector, Amritsar, classified the aforesaid area for fixation of compensation into two categories viz. the potential building area and the agricultural land. The Collector categorised 60 kanals and 18 marlas (i.e. 30450 sq. yds.) which abutted on the Circular Road and Majitha Road as potential building area and the remaining 771 kanals and 4 marlas as agricultural land and by his order dated December 2, 1959 awarded Re. 1/- per sq. yd. as compensation for the potential building area and Re. -/6/- per sq. yd. for agricultural land. Dissatisfied with the award, the erstwhile proprietors approached the Collector requesting him to make references to the Senior Sub-Judge, Amritsar, under Section 18 of the Act. The Senior Sub-Judge made a spot inspection for the purpose of appraisal of the evidence adduced before him and by his judgment and award dated June 9, 1962, accepted the classification made by the Collector but enhanced the compensation of the agricultural land to Re. 1/- per sq. yd. and of the potential building area to Rs. 1.50 per sq. yd. On appeal, the High Court after taking into consideration some transactions of sales in the locality proximate in point of time to the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act, the opinion of the valuers regarding the trend of the prices of land in the locality and the situation and potentialities of the land in question by its aforesaid judgment and decree dated January 3, 1968, awarded Rs. 3/- per sq. yd. for the agricultural land and Rs. 4.50 per sq. yd. for the potential building area. It is against this judgment and decree that the present appeals, as already stated, have been preferred.
(3.) At the hearing of these appeals, counsel for the appellants in the first set of ten appeals have, in the first instance, urged that as the plots of land in question formed one consolidated block, the entire area thereof should have been treated as potential building area and compensation awarded accordingly. It has been next contended by counsel for the appellants particularly in Appeals Nos. 2402 and 2403 of 1972 that the High Court has erred in overlooking the evidential value furnished by (i) the award made by the Collector, Amritsar fixing Rs. 4/12/- per sq. yd. as compensation for the land measuring 28.75 acres in Amritsar (Urban) and 32.04 acres in village Tungbala, Urban which was sought to be acquired in February, 1947, and notification under Section 4 (1) of the Act in respect whereof was published on February 22, 1947, (ii) the price paid by the appellants in purchasing some of the plots in question in October, 1946, and January, 1947, and (iii) the transactions of sale of the land in the locality made in 1958-59 which conclusively established that the market value of the land in question was much higher than that awarded by the High Court. On the other hand, it has been contended by counsel for the State of Punjab and collector, Amritsar, that the material on record did not warrant the enhancement by the High Court of the compensation awarded to the erstwhile proprietors by the Senior Subordinate Judge Amritsar; that the High Court could not justifiably ignore the fact that for 25 kanals and 10 marlas of land which lay in close proximity to the plots of land in question and was acquired by the State in May, 1956, the market value was assessed at Rs. 25/- per marla i.e. Re. 1/- per sq. yd.; and that in any event, the High Court acted illegally in awarding compensation in excess of Rs. 4/- per sq. yd. claimed by the respondents in the second set of six appeals Nos. 2694, 2695 and 2697 to 2700 of 1972.;