RAJESH BINDAL J. - (1.) THIS order will dispose of the above-mentioned two appeals as both these arise out of the common award dated 22.2.1984, passed by Additional District Judge, Ambala.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts, as noticed from R.F.A. No. 1216 of 1984, are that vide notification No. 7313/IL/NGL dated 16.5.1978 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, 'the Act'), 6.37 acres of land situated in Village Kanwala, Tehsil and District Ambala was acquired for the purpose of construction of Kanwala Distributory from R.D. 9.440 K.M. (30971.13 feet) to R.D. 17.430 K.M. (57.185.04 feet). Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 16.5.1978. The award was announced on 27.8.1978 granting a compensation of Rs. 9,000/- per acre. As the land owner was dissatisfied, he filed objections, which were referred to the learned Additional District Judge, Ambala for consideration. Vide award dated 22.2.984, the learned Court below enhanced the compensation to Rs. 30,000/- per acre as against Rs. 9,000/- per acre granted by the Land Acquisition Collector. Still dissatisfied, the land owner/appellant is in appeal before this Court for further enhancement of the compensation, whereas the State is also in appeal against the award of the learned Additional District Judge praying for reduction in the compensation awarded.
(3.) THE appeal came up for hearing earlier on 2.6.1989 and after hearing learned counsel for the parties, this Court passed the following order: "This judgment of mine would dispose of Regular First Appeal No. 1216 of 1984, filed by the landowner/claimant and Regular First Appeal No. 720 of 1984, filed by the State of Haryana, as both these arise out of the common award of the Additional District Judge, Ambala dated February 22, 1984. The landowner- claimant has claimed enhanced compensation in his appeal, whereas the State has sought the indulgence of this Court for reduction of compensation. The facts of the case may in the first instance be noticed before discussing the points. The land measuring 6.37 acres situated in Village Kanwala, Tehsil and District Ambala was acquired in pursuance of a notification published under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short, 'the Act') on 16th May, 1978, for the purpose of construction of Kanwala Distributory from R.D. 9.440 K.M. To R.D. 17.430 K.M. in village Kanwala, Tehsil and District Ambala. The Land Acquisition Collector determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 9,000/- per acre. The Additional District Judge, Ambala, on reference under Section 18 of the Act has determined the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 30,000/- per acre. The Additional District Judge, Ambala while evaluating the land at Rs. 30,000/- per acre has relied upon the award given by the Land Acquisition Court dealing with the same notification for the same purpose for the land situated in village Jandli. The award Exhibit P-3 which has been relied upon was dealing with the land situated in village Jandli adjacent to village Kanwala. Mr. Y. K. Sharma, Advocate for the landowner-claimant has argued that the Additional District Judge has not granted any compensation for damage which has been suffered by the appellant on account of severance of his land. He has pointedly brought to my notice to paragraph 6(ii) of the claim application in which Rs. 30,000/- was claimed by way of compensation for the severance of the other land of the applicant by Act of acquisition of the land in question. The relevant plea is reproduced below : "The compensation for the severance of the other land of the applicant by Act of acquisition of the land in question amount to Rs. 30,000/. (The middle portion of the killa has been acquired and the acquired land has bifurcated the other part of the killa into two small parts and the acquired land approximately runs in between the two unacquired portions of the land. Unacquired land which remains with the applicant has become totally unfit for cultivation purposes etc. The other land even cannot be sold in plots for industrial and commercial purposes etc. as the canal runs in between the same killa and there is no facility for any passage. So, the acquisition has badly hit the other land of the applicant." The above mentioned averment was denied in the corresponding paragraph by the State. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the Additional District Judge should have framed an issue on the point of severance and thereafter determine the compensation payable to the claimant. No issue was framed on the point of severance. Since the Additional District Judge has omitted to frame and try an issue which was essential to the right decision of the reference under Section 18, this case must be remitted to the Additional District Judge with a direction that an issue which arises out of the plea raised in paragraph 6 (ii) be framed. The Additional District Judge, Ambala is further directed to grant appropriate opportunities to the parties to lead their evidence in support of the issue to be framed by him on the point of grant of compensation on account of severance and submit his report to this Court. The evidence along with the findings thereon would be sent to this Court within one year from the date when the parties put in appearance before the Additional District Judge, Ambala. The records of the case along with the copy of this order be dispatched to the Court of Additional District Judge, Ambala, without any delay.";