Full Text
*< IN THE HIGH
%
COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 22nd. 'tv 2077
+ LA.APP. 848/2008
MIR SINGH DECEASED THRU LRs
& ORS. Appellants fhrough: Mr.Deepak Khosla, Advocate
Mr.sanjay r;oo:;tggLffffit
. Counsel (LA), GNCTD
,/
ANP
LA.App.8 49/2008v LA.App.851/2008, LA.App.852 l2o}8, lA.App.85412008, LA.App.33412009, LA.App.3 3512009, 1A.App.33712009, LA.App.338/2009, LA.App.3 4312009 & CM
APPL.LL494l20Og (Cross Objections), LA.App.3 45/2009, LA.APP.7 l2OLO, LA.APP.47 5I2OIO AND LA.APP.6 56I2OLO
Through: Mr.S.K.Rout,' Mr.B.D.Sharma and
Mr.B.K.Routray, Advocates for appellants in LA.App.No.656I2OLO
Mr.S.K.Rout, Mr.B.D.Sharma and
Mr.B.K.Routray, Advocates in
LA.App.No.475l2 010
JUDGMENT
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2, To be referred to Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRADEEP NANDRAIOG. I. (OTaI) LA.App.No.848/2008 & connected matters Page I of[5] 2011:DHC:13860 t
1. Concerned with a notification dated 13.10.1980 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act which resulted in an award No.12l82-83, tearned Land Acquisition Collector determined market value of agricultural lands in village Neelwal @ t[2],500/- per bigha.
2. A perusal of the award would reveal that the learned Land Acquisition Collector had no evidence of any sale transaction in the village as also the adjoining village Hiran Kudna. He had one sale deed pertaining to the next adjoining village i.e. Dichaun Kalan, and treating the same to be the evidence, the Land Acquisition Collector opined that value of agricultural land in village Dichaun Kalan would be T[2],000/- per bigha, which was opined to be the fair market value of agricultural land in the adjoining village Hiran Kudna as well. But, keeping in view the situational and locational advantage of the revenue estate of village Neelwal, the learned Land Acquisition collector determined T[2],500/- per bigha as the fair market value of land in villag.e Neelwal as of 13.10.1980.
3. lt stands out that vis-a-vis village Hiran Kudna and village Neelwal the Land Acquisition Collector determined the market value in the ratio {2,000/-: {2,500/-, which converts itself into the ratio 4:5.
4. The land owners were ngt happy with the fair market value determined and sought reference under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.
5. When the reference was pending, LAC No.L4lIgg[6] was decided by Sh.Padam Singh ADJ.Delhi on 31.5.1989 in which, with reference to the lands of village Mundka, which adjoins village Hiran Kudna, fair market value of land in village LA.App.No. 848/2008 & connected matters Page 2 of[5] Hiran frOn, as of 31.10.1980 was determined at {10,750/- per bigha.
6. Taking that to be the basis and observing that as per the award the lands in village Neelwal were sitautionally better located and this situational advantage gave the price advantage in the ratio 4:5, learned Reference Court held that in the same proportion the enhancement needs to be granted, but while so doing, for unexplainable reasons, reach the figure T12,990/- which has been awarded
7. lt may be highlighted that increased on the ratio 4:5, the sum of T10,750/- stands enhanced to T13,437.50 and notT12,900/- (T10,7501- x 5 + 4 = T13,437.50)
8. The map of Delhi would reveal, as also the award in question confirms, the fact that agricultural lands of village Neelwal are abutting towards the North and the South of agricultural lands of village Tikri Kalan.
9. Pertaining to a notification dated 10.1.1980 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, vide judgment and order dated 16.4.1996, deciding RFA No.4301L987 Nafe.v Sinah Vs. UOI a'Division Bench of this Court has held that fair market value of agricultural lands in village Tikri Kalan as of 10.1.1980 would be t15,200/-. The said decision has attained finality.
10. Since it being settled law that while determining fair market value of land mathematical precision would be an impossibility and that on broad probable factors, with reference to empirical data, fair market value has to be determined, I hold that in view of the evidence discussed by the Land Acquisition Collector as also the learned Reference LA.App.No. 848/2008 & connected matters Page 3 of[5] v Court, pertaining to agricultural lands in village Neelwal, we would have the position that on one side of the village is another village which is situationally disadvantaged and for which fair market value worked out as of 13.10.1980 is t10,750/- per bigha and on the other side we have a village i.e. Tikri Kalan which is situationally better advantaged, and for which, as of 10.1.1980 this Court has determined fair market value at T15,200/- per bigha, for the date 13.10.1980, increasing the price by L0% the fair market value qua said village would come to T16,300/-. The mean average of the two would be a just and a fair determination of the market value of lands in village Neelwal which would be t13,437 + t16,300 + 2 - {14,868/- per bigha.
11. I highlight that the sum of 1L[3],4371- is the figure which works out as per the reasoning of the learned Reference Court as explained in para 6 and 7 above and T16,300/- is the figure worked out with reference to the price of land in village Tikri Kalan. The village with the lesser price is situationally disadvantaged and the one with the better price is situationally advantaged and hence the mean average. L[2]. But I note the contention of Mr.Sanjay Poddar, learned counsel for the Union and reject the same. Learned counsel urged that pertaining to a notification dated I[4].7.L982 deciding RFA No.7771L987 Ra.ipal Vs. UOI (decided on 13.2.2005), a Division Bench of this Court assessed fair market value of land in village Dichaun Kalan at {12,500/- per bigha. Counsel states that depressing said price by L0% till the date 13.10.1980 i.e. the date of the notification with which I am concerned, the price comes to t10,000/- per bigha and since LA.App.No. 848/2008 & connected matters Page 4 of[5] lands in village Dichaun Kalan are loctionally disadvantaged vis-a-vis village Neelwal on the ratio 4:5 the value as per said decision could be enhanced to t12,500/- and with reference to the decision in Nafev Sinah's case, the mean average would work out to T16,300l- + <L[2],500/- + 2: T14,400/- per bigha.
13. I have worked out the fair compensation to t14,868/- per bigha and since exactness can never be achieved with LOO% precision, I adopt the figure worked out by me. L[4]. Appeal filed by the Union of India, being LA.App.Nos. 33412009., 335/2009, 33712009, 338/2009, 34312009, 34512009 and 475120L0 are dismissed.
15. LA App.Nos. 84812008, 84912008, 851/2008, 85212008, 85412008, 7120]-0 and 655/2010 and CM No.1149412009 (Cross Objections) in LA App.No.343/2009 are allowed directing that decree be drawn awarding compensation to the land owners @ t14,868/- per bigha. On the enhanced compensation the land owners would be entitled to statutory benefits under the Land Acquisition Act as explained in the decision of the Supreme Court reported as 93 (2001) DLT 569 Sunder Vs. UOl. Plus proportionate costs. -^--q*g) [6
JUDGE JULY 22,ZOLL mm LA.App.No. 848/2008 & ccinnected matters Page 5 of[5]