N.C.JAIN, J. - (1.) THIS judgment of mine would dispose of R. F. A. Nos. 1605 to 1611, 1875 to 1886, 1943 to 1945, 1965, 2016, 2025, 2308 of 1991, 2298 and 3959 of 1992 as they arise out of a common award of the District Judge, Ambala, dated 18. 5. 1991. All these appeals have been filed by the landowners.
(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are that the State of Haryana by virtue of issuance of notification dated 6. 6. 1983 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') sought to acquire 200. 71 acres of land situated in village Maheshpur, Tehsil Kalka, District Ambala for a public Purpose namely development and utilisation for industrial area. Under Section 6 of the Act, land measuring 194. 92 acres was acquired. However, on measurement the land was found to be 154. 44 acres only. The Land Acquisition Collector by his award dated 17. 9. 1986 has assessed the market value of the acquired-Chahi land @ 57,280/-, Barani @ Rs. 38,240/-, Banjar @ Rs. 19040/- and Gair Mumkin Rasta @ Rs. 9440/- per acre. The landowners feeling dissatisfied, sought references under Section 18 of the Act. The District Judge by his award under challenge before this Court has determined the market value of the acquired land at a flat rate i. e. Rs. 1,50,000/- per acre. The land-owners feeling dissatisfied with the award of the District Judge have filed these appeals before this Court. During the pendency of the aforementioned appeals before this Court learned counsel for the landowners in R. F. A. No. 1944 of 1991, Guljar Singh v. State of Haryana. have filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for production of four awards given by the land Acquisition Courts evaluating the acquired land in villages Fatehpur, Rally and Judian. Since the application has been given in the case of Guljar Singh whereas the main judgment has been given in case of Sushma v. State, I would be giving the main award in the case of Suhshma v. State, only but as regards additional evidence, the same would, stand allowed in RFA No. 1944 of 1991, Guljar Singh v. State of Haryana. The additional evidence is being allowed by me on the short ground that it is subsequent event and law is well settled that any subsequent event be taken into consideration by a Court of law. The four awards are therefore, ordered to be exhibited as Exhibits C-1 to C-4. As to what evidentiary value these awards carry, the same would be seen in the latter part of the judgment. In order to determine the market value of the acquired land, it is necessary to have a look at the evidence brought on the record of the case. The landowners produced as many as 11 witnesses. Besides this, they have also produced site plan Ex. P. 1, sale deeds Exhibits P-3 to P-7 and some awards including the ones produced before this Court. PW-1 Darbara Singh one of the claimants has stated that before the acquisition of the land in question the land of village Maheshpur was acquired along with the land of village Majra, Haripur, Ralli, Abheypur, Dhillan, Tensu, Judian, Ferozepur Kalan and Ferozepur. Village Maheshpur and the acquired land are situated on Ambala-Kalka Road. Sectors 2, 4, 5, 7, 12 and 12-A, according to this witness, were situated in front of the acquired land. The distance between the acquired land and the aforementioned Sectors was 100 yards. Ambala-Kalka road, it has been deposed, goes between Sector 12 and the acquired land. It has further been deposed that three roads of Panchkula connects the acquired land. Sectors 4, 12 and 12-A, according to this witness, were fully developed. It Has further been stated by him that Sector-4 was situated in village Haripur and Sector 5 was situated in village Judian and Ferozepur. The distance between Sectors 11 and the acquired land is 1/2 Kilometre. Bus-stand, according to the witness, was situated in Sector-5 which in turn is situated adjacent to Sectors-11 and 4. He has further stated that Sector-5 was fully developed having Cinema Hall and Commercial Establishments. According to this witness, Sector-11 is one kilometre away from the acquired land. He has further stated that village Maheshpur adjoins the boundaries of village Haripur, Devi Nagar, Ralli, Ralla and that village judian is situated at a distance of 1-1/2 kilometres from the acquired land. The market value, according to the witness, at the time of the notification was Rs. 5000/- per marla. He has further stated that abadi land was being sold at the rate of Rs. 10000/- per marla and that on the date of the making of statement the market value of the abadi land was Rs. 50,000/- per marla. The existence of shops of Property Dealers, Doctors, Flour Mill, Tea Vendors, Dhabas etc. in village Maheshpur was also stated. Notified Area Committee Manimajra was situated at a distance of 2-1/2 kilometres from the acquired land, according to this witness. In cross-examination the witness was constrained to admit that the acquired land was purely agricultural in nature at the time of the notification. It was denied by him in cross-examination that there was no development in the area at the time of the notification and that all developments took place after the acquisition of the land. It was further denied that the development of Sectors 11, 12, 12-A and 14 was not. there at the time of the acquisition of the land. It was further denied by him that Sector 5 was not developed. PW-2 Vijay Dhawan is a property dealer who after describing the location of the acquired land stated that in the year 1982 plolvof 10 marlas in Sectors 4, 12, 12-A were being sold at the rate of Rs. 55,000/-to Rs. 65,000/ -. He has staled that the acquired land was being sold at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per marla whereas the rate of abadi land of the village at the time of the acquisition was Rs. 4000/- per marla. This witness further stated that at prcsent rate was Rs. 25,000/- to Rs. 55,000/- per marla. He further stated that he had also negotiated the deal of some abadi plots and the average price per marla came to Rs. 35,000/ -. He further deposed that Panchkula Urban Estate was developed towards the acquired land as there was no other land which could be acquired. The value of the land situated on Ambala-Kalka Road, according to the witness, was higher than the land situated at Simla-Chandigarh road. The witness further stated that the disputed land was acquired for Sectors 20 and 21. Plots of Sector-21 according to him, have already been carved out whereas the plots of Sector 20 had not been carved out. He further stated that the State of Haryana had advertised the rate of the plots of Sector 21 at Rs. 250/- per square yard. In cross-examination, the witness had to admit that the acquired land was purely agricultural in nature. He was further constrained to admit that the prices quoted by him in the examination-in-Chief were there at the time of development of the sectors. He pleaded ignorance about the development charges by the Haryana Urban Development Authority. He could not produce any sale deed. He denied the suggestion that there was no development at the time of issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Kamal Krishan PW. 3 another claimant has stepped into the witness box and has deposed virtually on the same lines as has been the statement of PW-1. In examination-in-chief he has deposed about the location of some Sectors and dividing roads with reference to the site plan Exh. P. 1. In Cross-examination the witness was constrained to admit that Sector 5 was situated at a distance of 1-1/2 kilometre from the acquired land. He further admitted that on the right side of the road which leads from Zirakpur to Kalka there was no development. He further admitted that the acquired land was purely agricultural in nature except the village abadi. He has given the length of one Sector as 3/4th of a Kilometre. Ram Kumar Assistant Estate Officer, PW 5 produced the master plan of Panchkula showing the location of Sectors 1 to 2. Jagir Singh another claimant who appeared as PW-6 stated that he sold, twelve marlas of land in the abadi of village Maheshpur for Rs. 24,000/- vide sale deed Exh. P. 2. He stated that there was no shop near the land sold by him. In Cross-examination he admitted that he sold the land vide Exh. P. 2 in the year 1987.
(3.) STATEMENT of Angrej Singh claimant PW-7 is also similar to the statements of other claimants. Som Nath Patwari PW-8 has deposed that Urban Estate Panchkula was developed in the year 1971. The land of about fifteen villages including the land of village Maheshpur was notified for acquisition in the year 1971 for the first time. Later on, fresh notification was issued in the year 1973. Only part of revenue estate of village Maheshpur was acquired. Notification, according to this witness, was quashed in respect of the remaining part of revenue estate of Maheshpur and fresh notification was issued on 6. 6. 1983. He has further stated that land belonging to village Judian was also acquired for urban estate Panchkula. In cross-examination, the witness was constrained to admit that the land of village Judian was situated at a distance of four to five kilometres from the land in question of village Maheshpur. He has further stated in cross-examination that Dhillon Cinema was on the land of village Judian. The Said land of village Judian was close to Union Territory of Chandigarh. According to him the land of village Judian was better situated than the acquired land.;