S.S.Sandhawalia, J. - (1.) REGULAR First Appeal No. 141 of 1970 presented by the land owner -claimants and the cross Appeal No. 259 of 1970 preferred by the State of Haryana raise identical issues of law and fact and are, therefore, being disposed of by this single judgment.
(2.) BY a notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated the 25th March, 1964, an area of more than. It bighas was sought to be acquired for the public purpose of construction of Punjab Roadways Workshop and Bus stand in the township of Rewari. In the subsequent notification under section 6 an area of 10 Bighas and odd, however, was taken possession of. In the proceedings, that followed, the Land Acquisition Collector by his award dated the 30th of September 1963 allowed compensation to the land -owners at a uniform rats of Rs. 8780/ - per acre. The landowners apparently dissatisfied with the aforesaid assessment of value preferred references under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act claiming substantial enhancement thereof. The claim was resisted on behalf of the State and on the pleadings of the parties as many as seven issues were struck by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurgaon, to which detailed reference is unnecessary as learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the only and material one is issue No 2 with regard to the market value of the acquired land. By the judgment under appeal the learned Additional District Judge enhanced the compensation awarded to a uniform rate of Rs. 12/ - per - square yard As noticed, both the land -owners and the State of Haryana have come up by way of appeal
(3.) MR . M.L. Sarin appearing for the appellant laid owners with his usual (sic) pointed his argument only with regard to Exhibit P 9 proved on the record by the appellants. This is a copy of the judgment of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Gurgaon, dated the 31st of January 1956, where by with regard to Khasra Nos. 1602 and 1603 situated at a distance of about two to three furlongs from the acquired land the (sic) was awarded at a rate of Rs. 12/ - per square yard. Mr. Sarin highlighted the fact that in fact the acquisition covered by Exhibit P 9 was made as far back as 1952. On these premises the main thrust of the learned counsel's argument was that in the present case where the acquisition has been made twelve years thereafter the prices must necessarily have gone up and it was submitted that judicial notice of this rise be taken and the compensation be suitably enhanced.;