AJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These civil appeals raise the question of award of compensation under Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The respondent, State of Punjab issued a notification under S. 4 on 4-10-1978 for acquisition of land measuring 284 kanals and 9 marlas situated in the Revenue Estate of village Daulatpur, Pathankot. The public purpose of acquisition was for construction of godowns by the Central Ware-housing Corporation. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 330/- per marla besides solatium at the rate of 15 per cent and interest at the rate of 6 per cent from 4-11-1978 to the date of actual payment. Not being satisfied with the same, the appellants preferred application for references under S. 18 of the Act. On reference the learned Additional District Judge enhanced the compensation from Rs. 330/- per marla to Rs. 700/-. To such of those claimants like the appellants who had received the amount of compensation as per the award. Without any protest, this enhancement was denied.

(2.) Thereupon, the appellants preferred Regular First Appeal No. 447 of 1982 to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The learned single Judge was of the view that two sale deeds Exhibits A6 and R6 would provide the necessary data. Exhibit A6 dated 14th January, 1977 covers 7 marlas of land situated at a distance of about 50 yards from the suit land. The sale consideration thereunder was Rs. 700/-. The other sale deed R6 dated 16th August, 1978 relates to the sale of 2 and a half marlas of land for Rs. 1000/-. The area covered by the sale deed lies at a distance of just 20 feet from the suit land. Based on this, the fixation of Rs. 700/- per marla was upheld. In this view, he dismissed the appeal.

(3.) The only point urged before us in this case is that there is enough evidence to establish the lands were sold for higher value. If the average of these sale deeds is worked out the appellant should be entitled to more than Rs. 700/- per marla. Even otherwise, on the basis of Exhibit A6 itself, the appellant would be entitled to Rs. 1000/- per marla. There is no justification in denying the same. The High Court has gone wrong in upholding the order of the learned District Judge under which an average was struck between sale deeds A6 and R6. The appellants cannot be denied the benefit of enhancement in view of the application under S. 18 of the Act having been filed.