N.C. Jain, J. - (1.) This judgment of mine will dispose of Regular First Appeal Nos. 1649 to 1654 of 1987 filed by the land owner-claimants and Regular First Appeal Nos. 1625 to 1630 of 1987 filed by the Punjab State Electricity Board as they arise out of common award of the Additional District Judge, Faridkot, dated 28-2-1987. Land measuring 117 Kanals 13 Marlas situated in village Naya Moga Tehsil Moga, District Faridkot, has been acquired by the Punjab State for construction of 220 KV Sub-station at Moga by issuance of a notification dated 10-2-1982 under Sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Land Acquisition Collector, Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala, awarded compensation for the acquired land at the rate of Rs. 20,000.00 per acre. Under Sec. 18 of the Act, the Additional District Judge by his award challenged before this Court has determined the maiket value of the acquired land at Rs. 44,000.00 per acre. The Additional District Judge while determining the market value at the aforesaid rate has taken into consideration Exhibit A.6 sale deed executed and registered on 13-8-1984. The learned Counsel for the claimants Mr. M.L. Sarin, Senior Advocate, has argued that the Additional District Judge should have taken into consideration Exhibit A.5, A.7 and A. 8 which have been ignored wrongly. He has further argued that the Additional District Judge could have also made Exhibit A.11 award of the Court as the basis for determining the market value of the acquired land. It has further been argued that the Additional District Judge was in error in not placing reliance on Exhibit A.11 on the ground that the land with which the Court dealt was situated on by-pass. The precise argument of learned Counsel for the land-owners is that Exhibit A.11 dealt with the acquisition of land measuring 866 kanals and, therefore, determination of market value by Exhibit A.11 would become relevant for determining the market value of the present acquired land because the land subjected to valuation vide Exhibit A.11 was situated only at a distance of little more than 1 Km. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State has vehemently argued that Exhibit A.6 could not be relied upon, the same being transaction of sale of a small plot of land measuring 2 Kanals and that this transaction of sale was post dated notification. The precise argument of learned Counsel for the State is that the sale deed Exhibit A.6 having been registered 2-1/2 years after the notification in the present case could not be legally relied upon by the learned Additional District Judge for determining the market value of the land acquired. Before determining the market value of the acquired land, the chart which is reproduced below be noticed:- JUDGEMENT_89_LAWS(P&H)4_19891.html
(2.) After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, upon perusing of the entire evidence and applying all my guess work which is so inherent in determining the market value in land acquisition cases, I am of the view that it would be fair, just and equitable to determine the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 54,000.00 per acre. The Additional District Judge is not right in placing reliance upon Exhibit A.6. While discarding Exhibits A.5, A.7 and A.8, the learned Additional District Judge has observed that these sale transactions cannot be relied upon, they being post dated notification. If such like reasoning can be said to be cogent for discarding Exhibits A.5, A.7 and A.8 it is not understandable as to why this reasoning would not apply with greater force for not relying upon Exhibit A.6 which was executed and registered 2 -1/2 years after the notification. For arriving at the figure of Rs. 54,000.00 sufficient support can be drawn from Exhibits A.5, A.7 and A.8 the three sale-deeds which are dated 28-5-1982, 3-3-82 and 4-3-82 respectively that is immediately after the notification. By these three sale deeds land measuring 7 Kanals, 1 Marla, 4 Kanals and 4 Kanals respectively were sold bringing out the average price per acre at Rs. 56,824/-, Rs. 60,000.00and Rs. 60,000.00 respectively. When the average of these three sale transactions of sale is taken out, it comes to Rs. 58,941/- or say Rs. 59,000.00 per acre. It has been found as a fact by the learned Additional District Judge that the pieces of land forming these three transactions of sale are situated at a little distance from the acquired land. This is another reasoning given by the learned Additional District Judge for discarding these three transactions of sale. This reasoning, in my view, can rather be availed of for placing reliance upon the sale deeds rather than discarding them. The only precaution which can be taken is that lesser compensation can be granted than what was fetched by way of the aforesaid sales. Since the distance cannot be described to be much, it would be just apt to reduce the average sale price of these sale transactions by a sum of Rs. 5,000.00 and determine the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 54,000.00. Besides, the consideration of these three sale deeds, Exhibit A.11 an award, can also be used as corroborative piece of evidence for arriving at the figure of Rs. 54,000.00. By virtue of Exhibit A. 11 an award of the Court, land measuring 866 Kanals was evaluated at the following reates : JUDGEMENT_89_LAWS(P&H)4_19892.html It is not the case of the State that the present acquired land had any pit or that the acquired land can be said to be suffering from any disadvantage of the type warranting the determination of the market value of the acquired land in the last two categories, afore-referred. In my view, the land in dispute can very well be evaluated at somewhat lesser rate below the valuation which was put for the category of remananting land in Ex. A. 11. The land which was evaluated by Ex. A.11 was certainly situated at a more advantageous location being on the bye-pass. At the same time it cannot be lost sight of that the court while relying upon Ex. A.11 was dealing with the notification of the year 1975. By the time the present land was acquired, it can well be presumed that the acquired land must have become costlier, if not of the same value which could easily be put on the land of bye-pass. Therefore a deduction of 10 per cent would be called for. In this manner also, the market value of the acquired land would come to Rs. 54000.00 per acre.
(3.) In the light of the observations made above, the appeals filed by the landowner claimants are allowed with proportionate costs. They are also entitled to the statutory benefits of the amended provisions of Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act. In consequence of the acceptance of the appeals of the claimants, the appeals filed by the Punjab State Electricity Board are dismissed with no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.;