- (1.) THIS appeal has been filed by Mangoo Ram and others, the claimant -appellants for enhancement of compensation determined by the Additional District Judge,? (Court No. 1), Ghaziabad vide judgment and decree dated 27.11.2002 passed on Land Acquisition Reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short the 'Act').
(2.) WE have heard Sri S. K. Tyagi appearing for the claimants? and Sri? Amit Manohar appearing for New Okhla Industrial Development Authority. The land belonging to the claimants was acquired vide notification dated 15.02.1992 under Section 4 of the Act. Possession was taken on 25.02.1995. The Special Land Acquisition Officer made an award on 16.12.1996 awarding a compensation @ Rs.41.31 paise per sq. yard. Thereafter, the claimants filed a reference under Section 18 of the Act seeking enhancement of compensation to Rs.600/ - per sq. yard. The reference court vide judgment and decree dated 27.11.2002 enhanced the compensation from Rs.41.31 paise per sq. yard to Rs.140.00. The solatium, interest and other statutory dues were also awarded.
(3.) LAND in question is situate in village Gejha Tilapatabad which admittedly is within close proximity and adjacent to villages Nagla Charan Das, Chhalera Banger and Bhangel Begampur. The reference court placed reliance, on arriving at a conclusion, that compensation is liable to be enhanced to Rs.140.00 per sq. yard, on another judgment of the reference court dated 30.05.1992 passed in L. A. R. No. 250 of 1990 and 276 of 1996 in respect of village Bhangel Begampur. Learned counsel for the claimant -appellants have pointed out that decision in LAR No. 250 of 1990 in respect of village Bhangel Begampur was subject matter of challenge by the claimants therein by way of various First Appeals before this Court which were connected together decided by a detailed judgment and order dated 19 -05 -2010 passed by a Division Bench in leading First Appeal No. 1056 of 1990 (Raghuraj Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others). From a perusal of the judgment, we find that the said Division bench has relied upon the judgment in L.A.R. No. 392 of 1993 (Ram Chandra and others vs. State of U.P. and others) relating to village Bhangel Begampur filed as additional evidence wherein the rate of Rs.58.93 paise per sq. yard awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was enhanced to Rs.500 per sq. yard. But after making 1/3rd deduction towards development charges owning to the largeness of the area was scaled down to Rs.300/ - per sq. yard. It would be relevant to quote following observations from the judgment in the case of Raghuraj Singh : "It seems that during the pendency of the instant appeals certain developments took place and subsequent to the same certain awards have been made by the reference court with respect to certain other acquired lands which are similar to that of the appellants herein. To bring the same in the notice of this court, the appellants have filed a supplementary paper -book along with an application for the same to be taken on record on 13.08.2003. It is important to mention here that this court can take notice of such additional evidences under the provisions of Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Order XLI Rule 27, C.P.C. provides that: 27.Production of additional evidence in Appellate Court - [1] The parties to an appeal shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence, whether oral or documentary, in Appellate Court. But if [a] the court from whose decree the appeal is preferred has refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted, or [aa] the party seeking to produce additional evidence, establishes that notwithstanding the exercise of due diligence, such evidence was not within his knowledge or could not, after the exercise of due diligence, be produced by him at the time when the decree appealed against was passed, or [b] the Appellate Court requires any document to be produced or any witness to be examined to enable it to pronounce judgement, or for any other substantial cause, the Appellate Court may allow such evidence or document to be produced, or witness to be examined. [2] Whenever additional evidence is allowed to be produced by an Appellate Court, the Court shall record the reason for its admission. In accordance with the aforesaid provision, the appellant has produced a large number of documents, which are on record, for consideration by this Court in the form of supplementary paper book. These are the awards made by the reference court in subsequent proceedings with respect to the similar land acquired by the defendant/State. According to the argument advanced by the appellant, the aforesaid awards given in these documents as well as the order of the reference court should be taken into account while considering the claim of the appellants. The appellants contend that they have been deprived of their valuable land by the State largesse without being comepnsated justifiably for the same. The above mentioned documents were permitted to be included as part of the pleadings advanced by the appellants, as we think that the aforementioned documents are important to be taken into consideration by this Court so as to reach on correct factual position to decide the present case. ";