- (1.) This judgment of mine would dispose of Regular First Appeal Nos. 1619 to 1622 and 1666 of 1984, 1810, 1853, 1854 and 1761 to 1763 of 1986, 1960 of 1985, 57 to 59, 156, 730 and 909 to 913 of 1987 and 1201 of 1988 arising out of the land acquired in village Maloya (in short called 'Maloya cases') and Regular First Appeal Nos. 293, 299 to 308, 403 to 405, 1272, 278 and 316 of 1989 as well as Cross-Objection Nos. 86-CI to 90-CI of 1989 in Regular First Appeal Nos. 300 and 303 to 306 of 1989 respectively arising out of land acquired in village Badheri (in short called 'Badheri cases'). The aforementioned appeals and Cross-Objections arise out of common notification issued by the Union of India under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') dated 20th February, 1969 acquiring 185.74 acres of land in Maloya and 54.13 acres of land in village Badheri for development of Sector 39, Chandigarh. As regards Maloya cases, the facts need be noticed in detail. The Land Acquisition Court, in the first instance, disposed of Maloya cases by rendering awards on different dates in the years 1970, 1971 and 1972. The appeals were filed by the claimants.
(2.) R.N. Mittal, J., while disposing of some appeals on 5th November, 1973, remanded the cases to the District Judge for decision along with Badheri cases, which were stated to be pending at the time R.N. Mittal, J., passed the remand order. The remand order runs as follows :- "The Learned District Judge while deciding the cases did not consider the oral evidence led by the parties. He has decided those references on the basis of the award of the Land Acquisition Collector dated April 5, 1969, relating to village Badheri and reduced the prices fixed by him of the lands of that village arbitrarily. That award has been challenged by both the parties and references are pending in his Court. In case these prices are varied by the District Judge, the prices of the lands of village Maloya shall also be effected. It is not disputed by the counsel for the Union of India that the lands of both the villages were notified under Section 4 by the same notification and that both the villages are contiguous. In the circumstances, it would have been appropriate if the references relating to village Maloya and village Badheri would have been decided simultaneously. He should have also discussed the oral evidence on the record, in the judgment. For the reasons recorded above, I accept all the appeals and remand the cases to the Learned District Judge, Chandigarh, for decision afresh after taking into consideration the observations made above. I also order that the Court fee of the appeals be refunded to the parties concerned. In the circumstances of these cases, I make no order as to costs."
(3.) M.R. Sharma, J., on 11th November 1977, while agreeing with the remand order again remanded the other set of case of village Maloya. The learned District Judge under the impugned award decided Maloya cases and determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 14,000/- per acre but gave different rates by holding that land owners could not be awarded more than what they had claimed. For determination of market value, the District Judge has relied upon Exhibit PB, a decision given by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 363 of 1968, by which the land owners were held entitled to the grant of compensation at the rate of Rs. 14,000/- per acre.;