Full Text
Through: Mr.L.B.Rai, Advocate VCTSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Sanjay Poddar, Advocate for R-1 Mr.B.B.Sharma, Advocate for DDA
ORDER o/o 08.07.20LL For orders, see LA.APP.N o. 78412005.
-fi PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.
JULY 08, 20Lt mm 2011:DHC:13951 I l' r1'*r, L{ft ': : si ;f "4f '}
.rit :'*r.F "r .rd, t*- ,r/ OF # lhl Tr-lE HtcH. couir DELHI AT NEW DELHI
JAMNA
LA,AP|. 784l2Q0s : iLA.APP.
4 dated'.
Appeltant
Through:
LJOI & ORS LA.APP.7 84/2005 & connected Mr.L.B.Rai, Advocate, .M r,l.S. DahiYa, Advocate'
' Mr.D.S.Lakra, Advocate' Mr.K.Sunil, Advocate, '-
Mr.Anuj Bhandari, Advoc.ate ruf t.Sf.'u'Oam Fa rashat, Advocate
Vbrsus i .i .t ResPondents'
Through:
IND.
,'l , LA.APP. 81912005,' LA'APP' tzl.2}O.?, t43l2OO7
' (Relating 'to 25'.O2.td}l & Award No '21L999-2000'
A.ND , Mr.SanjaY Poddar, $tanil.ing ccjunsei (-LA), GNCT Delhi with rtf t.o"apif.u, ft/lr.Sachin Nawani and
Mi. siodt'larth Panda Advocates Mr.AjaY Verma', Ms'Kanika : agniiiitti, Mr.Kunal sharma' '
' ltti,srmer Sethi, Mr'B'B'Shar'ma'' :; Ms.Shobhna Takiar and Mr'Arun
''
Bitbul, Advo.cates for DDA ', .i BB0-BB U200s, Notification u/s
Village Mundka)
'1251t}IQ, !A.APP. 16+l?010, LA.
1.)/./1^ir.A , r. I n.DD rhnllnrn la : LA.APP:
186/2010, LA. i npp. 2ool?0r0, LA.APP. 23812010, LA.APP.
?--'--F..r:' ^-l.^ ZZgDA\o, LA.App. 243l2pll, LA.APP.,' 24412010, . LA.APP.
245nl:r0, m.npp. 247 2bt}, LA.APP, 25U2OIO, LA:APP.
2s2l2}r}, LA.APP. 26pl2}t}, LA.APP. ?9i_l?0\0; lA" fll
273120L0, LA.APP. 27'4l2OlO, LA.APP. 275120]-0, LA.APP.
3I2:2OL0, LA.APP. 324120L0, L.A. APP. 32612070, LA.APP.' . .
327120]0, . LA.APP. 329120'10, ' LA.APP. . 33012010, LA.APP.
33II2OIO, LA.APP. 33212010, LA.APP. 33312010 with CM APPL.
No. 5524120II, LA,APP.' 335/20.10, LA.APP. ?67 l?Ol0 , LA.APP. '
368/2010, LA.APP. , 369l20ro, LA.APP. . 37112010 & cM 'APPL.
No.2009 gl2o:*o, LA.APP. 37 412010, . LA,APP. 37 512010. LA.APP.
37712010, LA.APP.37gl2OI0, LA.APP. 423120IA, LA:APP.
452l2OrO, LA.APP. 46Ll2OrO,' LA.APP' 472l2OrO, LA.APP.
69412010, l-AjAPP. 69612010 & CM APPL. No. 6340120l-1, LA.APP. .
69712010, 'LA.APP. 69812010 . & cM Appt-. 17341?017, LA.APP.
706120;:0 & CM APPL. 7,/2I5I2OIO, LA.APP. 70712010, IA.APP.
7o1lz011o, LA.App. 7Ogtzg10, LA.APP. TIol2o1o with cM APP[.
'
, No.2568 l2OI1, LA.APP. 71312010 with CM APPL. No.74.73I2OLO, F
LA.App. 71512010, LA.APP. 7t7 12010, LA.APP. 7l-912010, LA.APP.' .
,76612010,. LA.APP. 79'612010,'. LA.APP. 79712010, LA.APP.i "
7gqtao:ro, LA.APP. 7ggl2o:Io,' LA.APP. 818/2OIO, LA.APP.
8T}I2OIO, LA.APP. 829I2OLO, LA.APP. 831/2010 & CM APPL.
95512011, LA.APP . B32QAL,O , LA,APP. 833/2010 , & cM APPL. ,ir
63g2l2oII,LA,APP'834|2010;''LA.APP,'842|201"0,mjnpp
87U2OJO, LA.APP. 87 4l20IO, LA.APP. 8751201.9, LA:APP. '
876nC;\0, LA,APP. 87712010, LA.APP.' 878"/2010, LA.APP"
'B7gl2O1O, LA.APP. BBO/TOLO,' LA.APP. BB1/2010 ', & cM
APPL.650 5120'II, LA.APP. 88212010,' LA.APP. 883/2010, LA.APP.
FB4l2dIO , LA.APP. 88612010, LA.APP. 88812010, LA.APP. isagnoto & cu App t.zz,qgtzo11, LA.APP, B9ol2o\0, LA.APP.
" 893/2010 & CM APjPL. 675Ol2OtI, LA.APP..8g4poto & CM rul.zs.:,531?oro, - lR.App. Bg5l2o10, LA.APP, Bgil2o10,' LA.APP,'
8g7I2O1O & CM AP.PL,72BI2OII, LA.APP. }O3I}OLO, LA.APP.
LA.APP.7 84/2005 & connected ". .:Page2.oft9" f;
't I grl LA,APP. t22120r0 ri T gol lzoto, LA.APP. 9:8/ZOtO, LA.APP. . g3.gl2olo, ', LA'APP' loiiiolo s. ft nppr- iosolzou, LA.APP' tololzoror & cr"r
AppL. 5673120:rI, m.App, l}4ll2o10, . LA.APP.
'104312010t | :
^ Ann 1t\Aol' LA.APP.I}45/2oto,m.Rpp.Io46l2ot0,'LA.APP.t048l20L0,'
Ln.npp." IO4gl2O10,, LA.APP, 1050/2010, LA.APP.. 1056l?919, LA.APP.1060/2010,1A,APP.106u2010,'LA'APP't07u20L0'
LA.APP, 12512011, LA.APP, T26I2OIL,' LA.APP. 258I2OLI
(Relating to Notification u/s 4 dated 21.03.2003.; & Awprd.
No.3/2005-06, Village-Mundka)
: AND LA.App. 600/2009,: LA.APP. ObS/ZOOg, LA.APP. 6,15/2009;
LA.APP.'31012010,LA.APP.32512010,LA,APP,37612010,1.A'APP'
383/2010, LA'APP...3}4l2olo, LA.APP.385/2010, LA.APP:
473,12010, LA.APP. 4g2l2olo, . LA.APP. 58612010 , LA.APP, 5gr.l2olo, LA.AP.P, 63812010, LA'APP. 69O/2010, LA'AI? ogz.lzol.o, LA.APP.'7:]20:-o, LA.APP.' 7]-6120]-0, LA'APP'
7 63l2oIQ, tR,App. g77zy1o, LA.APP. 873l2oIO, -'LA.APP.
885/20J-0, m.npp. 887|2O:IO, LA.APP, _891120].0, 'LA.APP.
.Bg2l2OIO, LA,App. B9B/2010, LA,npp. 9'0612010 & CM Appl.
No.4443 l2QI0^ LA.APP. 93712010 & CM APPL. 2329912010, LA.App. ro42l2o10; LA,APP, 104717010 .
(Relati6g to No.1/2005-06, .;
Notification u/s 4 dated 21.03'2003 & Award Village-Mgndka)
AND.:' .:
CM APPL. NO.5 ASAI)OTT, LA, APP. 1055/2010, .LA.APP. ro57l2oro, LA,APP. 1058/2010, LA.APP. 1059/2010, . LA'APP.
1068/2010, LA,APP, 1069/2010, LA.APP. 12412011, . LA.APP: t27l2}r. LA.APP. r21l2}r1, LA.APP . 259120rt .
^ .i, Paee 3 of 19 D- .-.?t I i[:i11]SJ:,)i,:ll"T:i"#,#;.,0' ou'uo 17'06 20os
Awafd' & LA,APP. 40/2009 & Cross Objections, LA,APP;' 42612009, m.App. 428l2OOg, 44212009, LA'APP.
' 61112009 ' ' LA:APP'
(R€lating . to
No.1/2006-07, otoilzoog; LA.APP. 27gl2o1o : :
. :.
;
(Relating to Notification y/r 4 dated 24.09.2003. &
No.3/200 4-05, Village-Bakkarwala) .
;:
AND:I | ,, ' :.
LA.APP. :ro2gl2oIo & CM No.5948 PqIt, 1030/2010,' LA.APP$ 1031/2010, LA.APP. 1033/2010 tto.oo+s l20rr, LA.npp. 106212010, 1063/2010'
No.6943 lz}:JjJ,, LA,APP. 706412010, LA.AP,P. 1066/2010, l.067 12010, LA.APP. 1 rt2011-, LA.APP. r22l20rl e o{
Notification u/s 4 dated 17.06.20b5
:
1.' Whether the Repofters of local papers to See the
JUDGMENT
2. To be referred to Reporter or not?.
3. Whether the judgment should be repofted PRADEEP NANDRAIOG, l. (Oral) t.
1. lam deciding the above captioned appeals "ld relatable civil miscellaneous applications which aielby way'of ' cross objections; all of which have bebn listed hereinabove. Awa rd 'a LA.APP. &cM &CM LA.APP, Awa rd:,b'. t[9]:1 Village-Bakkarwala)."i 'f' r. {,}:, MR.
2. The present decisio.n goricerns isstrb of fixation of falr market value of land in'the revenue estatg of Villug, bukfiu*jii. i land villaEe [{'undka. ':':,.i, ': ' 3. The dates on which fa,ir rharket value of the land haS r'i' t'r,, to be determined may be graphically noted.ai undgr:-.'l ___._.J i__ J-_.t_-.--__---J..___--,_i.. S.No.. Name of Villaoe jDate of notification under., Section 4 of the LA Act,.
1. B a kka 6wa la 24,g.2003 ';i
2. Bakkarwala_.77.6.2005: ',.'"'
2. Bakkarwala_.77.6.2005
3. Mundka '25.2,rgg[7].
4. Mundka 2I.3.2003 '' '.'
5. Mundka, 17.6.2005: ' ':;; "
4. lt may be highlighted that the notification 'at Serial No.2 hereinabove, pertaining to -Village Bakkarw?la; is the samb pursuant whereto lands were"acquired.in the revenue..estate of: Vi'llage Mundka; as per serial No.5 above.:. '..
5. Abutting NH-t0, leading,from the city of, Oetfri to.the,t township of Rohtak in the state of Haryana, are villages Mun'dka, Ghevra and Tikri Kalan.. Village Bakkarwala lies towards*the. other side of the southern boundary of village Mundkil., The difference between the topology of the two viilages is; whereas the land of village Mundka abuts NH-10, trlat of village Bakkarwala does not so abut; being on the otl-Ler side of the southern bounda ry of revenue estate of virtagg |4undka. 6.' As we piroceed from the city of Derhi'to the township of 'Ro'htak,. village Mundka is crossed. first, followed.rby village, 'Ghevra and then village Tikri Kalan. '.
7. Agricultural lands in viilage Mundka were acquired.LA.APP.784/2oo5&conneitbd[1].,?.,.5of19., I +. I q.l pursuant to a notification dated 25.2.Igg[7].'issued under'Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Ac[1] as per award N o.2ligggl2111', i Agricultu'ial lands in the revenue'estatii.of village, Myndka were ' further acquired pursuant to 'a notification dated 21 '3'2003 ' issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act as per award No.3/2005-06 as also award No.1/2005-06. Further lands in the revenue estate'of the same viitage were acquir'9d1Plrs.uant to a. notification dated \7.6:2005 issued undei.section 14'.of the Land. Acquisitioh Act as per Award No' 1312006-07'
8. Agricultural' lands in the revenue -estate of village Bakkarwala were acquired pursuant to a notification dated, 24.g.2003 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acqui'sition Act as.: r' )04-05. Further lands in the revenue.estate of ' i, ' per Award No.3/2( t the same village were acquired pursuant to a notification dated '. I 17.6.200,[5] (the same notification under which lands in village: Mgndga were acquired) as per award No.Il2006-07. '.; 9.|nahutshel|,the.LandAcquisitioncoilector,.i,. determined. the fair maiket value of the acquired lands, under all - I the awards, with reference to the minimum price for agricuitufal - | r^+ R-tt-: 't lap[6] 35,'notified by the Government.of NgT Delhi. ! 10, For clarity lmay note that pertaining to the i notification dated 25.2.Igg[7] under which agricultural'lands in the revenue estate of village Mundka were acquired, the lebrndd " 'tt, i,i.t ?:.t \ t' I Land Acquisition Collector determined the fair market value with reference to the minimum price for agricultural. lahp notified ' with effect from 1.4:-9g7'@ t10 lacs.per acre'and si19;e the date....'j. of Section 4 notification was anterior in qoint of time,"'.d'iscounteil I LA.APP.[7] 84l2oo[5] & connected g"{e of rs Pae t':,;''t the pribe for one'year E ILs% per annum. Thi,s pr;ice'wds ri adopted for category A lands; For lands in categorY B; the value was furthe'r'discounted by t90,000/- per acre. Perta'ining to the notifications dated 2L[3].2003 And'. 2!.9.2003,,.the. Lahd Acquisition Cotibctor re.lied. gpon". the notification.. fixing the minimum price of agricultural land is of I.4.2001'and.gave no benefit of enhancement with reference to the fact that the fair market value of the lands to be'determined wds as of 2\..3.2003 r. and 24.9.2003'. Even periainihg to the notificatiot^l; dated L[7].6.2005 which requireQ fair market value of land to be.determined in the yevenue estatds of viliage Bakkar:wala and village Mundka as of 17.6.2005, the Land Acquisition Co'llector determined the same with reference to the notification fixing mininrum vqlue 9f agricultural landS in Delhi as of 1.4;Q001 and Aggrieved by the determinationr of the fair market Vaiue of the lands by the Land Acquisitioi'n Collector, the land,owners sought a' reference under Section 18 qf the.. Land Acquisition Act L894 and on the reference being made, vide various judgments and decrees, which are under challenge in the above captioned ' appeals, the.Reference, Court. took corrective action, as per the view of the Reference Court, and gave no Incfease.
11. enhanced the fair market value. L[2]. a'.-.:.' i lri a nut shell, pertaining to.the notification datbd 25.2,Igg[7] vide which agricultural fands in'village Mun'dka were, acquired, the Reference Court adopted the same notification as. was adopted by the. Land Acquisition Co.!lector under w"hich th€:. LA.AP P,.[7] 84 / 2005 & co n nected. PdgeT ofig I lo.:: Government. of NCT Delhi had fixed th.e minin'1um - v'alue fgr ': agricultural lands in Delhi i.e. 1.4,1'997, but as agqinst the Land Acquisition,Collector depressing tft" price @ 11 '5%o f.sr full one yeai; adopting the percentage 11.5,.decreased the -value by i only 34 days inasmuch as the date' with reference wheieto Government had notified the minimurrlVdlue was.1.4.i992 and the notification under Se-ction 4 of the Land Acqi..rjsition Act was dated 25.2.Ig,g[7]. This was the value fixed for category + lands d. and for category B 'lands; with frefeFeRce to thq values fol category A land depressed the sarne by t90,000/- per acre.
13. Thus, for ca,tegory A lands the Reference 'couri determined the fair market value @ {9,89,,288/- per acre.and for category Q land the same wa,s d'etermineO. @.<.8,gg,Zg8l: pef: i S, _..... acre.'. $: "tt'. r'.. z 14, ',. f Pertaining to.the notifications',dated 27.3.2003 and.:: 24.9.2003 whereunder agricultural lands in village Mundka and. village Bakkdrwala;espectively were acquired, the Refe,rence Court took note of the fact that after the Government had notified. the minimum rates foi' agricultural lands in Delhi as'of I.4.2001 the next revision was.as of 30.8.2005. Using the sald dates and the minimum price notified by the Government of N9T Delhi, the Reference Court adopted tle principle of mean average, What the Reference Court did was to adopt the value as of:1.4.200I and increasing.the same by 1O% per annum.],,. fi _.deter.riirineb the enhanced price as of 2l-.3.2003 as also ' 24,9.2003. Therbafter the Reference Court 'took the value 'notifi'ed as of.30.8.2005 and depressing the same by 10%,per 1A.'APP.784/2005 & connected;.j I tt: I J I J /-'' -1 v t:v,: -'.r 'r...,.... '.' I _'t. annum Qetbrmined the s;uin arrived at'as of 2L 3.20Q[3] as also e t-,.-. t 24.g.20g[3]. The tlr,ro sUrns'arrived at were added and'divided by ' i.'.'-{. two. to arrive.at th'e mean figure as of 2!,3.2003, which,'f nete comes to T15,92,083.33 per: acrb (ln some dec.isions l.note the sum arrived at is t15,92,?15^). For the date 24.9;2003 the price determined was <20,4I,000/- per acre. 15..., Pertaining tct.' the notification dated l-7.6.2005 pursuant whereto agricultural lands Yerg acquired,in village. Bakkarwala and Mundka the learned Reference Cou;t adopted; the ririnimum price for. agricultural,la'nds notified by the i' Government of NCT Delh.i with effect from 1.4.2001 and giving E11'r increase @10% per annum determined' the value. and with' respect to the lands in.village Mundka, on account of,locational'",. advantage, being abutting "NH'.10.gave. 5% 'mbre. arid..' '... det'erminbd the faii market value as of.17.'O.ZOOS. in'sum oi <2r,37,0!7.75 per acre 'and for village trukkur*ala the pricq dbter:mined was t20,35,2551- per acre
16. In the aforesaid backdlop of the factual scenario in which I have 'pelned. profiled the reasoning of' thq Land.' -: Acquisition Collector as also that of the Reference.Court;'l.delve into the arguments adVanced before'me dUring hea'ring today. With reference to the evidence led in LAC; 77, No..3B4l[2] 004 lamna vs. uo.l & ors,, it was urged by s.h.,L,B.Rai, ' learned counsel-for the appeilant in LA App.No.784l0p[5], which E |Eol||ELJLvLJ||Jgl|v|Ll|1-.gyyu|lq||L|t|L,l,.yr,...,i-argument was adopted'by other learned c,ounsel who appea.fed for the. other appellants, that:the learned Trial Jud,ge was not justified in ignoring the sale deed Ex.P-1 whereunder f bigha -rJ.---.---'--T- -t,/1 'i ' { t'"1 " 'I,.[1] Was sold as of,,'.:: t38,000/- was: I' he land would' wa'of agricultu'ral' land in village for'a sale consideratibn of T[4],[7] towards sale dutY and -thus the and 3 bis 5.8.1996 incurred i. Mundka 5,000/-. price of t,be t[5],13,000/- and calculate$ with reference thereto,.land price ''.per bigha would come to t[4],46',000/-, as of 5.8.1996.' Lgbrned counsel would urge'that there is ho reason'not to hold that,fair market value of agricultural.lands. in village. Mundka: waS T[4],46,000/- per bigha 'as.of 5.8.1996. Taking the argrjment forwa6d, it is urged that with referenc".to the said'price, fair,. markdt value needs to be determined as of 25.2.1993,'.- 21,3.2003 and 17.6.2005', i.e. the dates when notifications.under ''' Section 4 of the Land. Acquisition Act were issued,'pursuant '', r l. wl;rereto agricultuial' lands were acquired lin village Mr'rnd.ka, by increasing the price progressively, if not. by 12% per annum at 'least bV 1..O% per annum. lt is'urged that-on the same basis, ', land.price-should be determined for the agr:ictiltural lbn'ds in.. village 'Bakkarwala. Alternatively, it.was urged that since villages"Tikpi Kalan, Mundka and Bakka.rwala are contiguous villages, and in fact village Tikri "(alan iS fur:ther towards the townshipofRohtak,someincreasebemadeinthe land in village Mundka and. Bakkarwala wfth referencg to tl" ' judgment and decree dated 19.72,2008 deciding a -batch'of ' Land Acquisition Appeals, lead matter 'being LA -Appeal ':i No.193/2 OOG Pratap Sinah @eceased), Thr., I=Rs Vs' UQl ?s per which fair market value of land, per bigha, was determined'in the revenue estate of village Tikri"Kalan.'as of 16.11.'1995,'t 11.6.'1996 and 17.I[2],2002 at T[2],!5,1641- for category' A land I ?r 1,1-... and.T[1],,73,5OOl- for category.B land; T[2],35,850 for Category A,' land and {1,90,150/- for category B land; '<4'02,,85qf- fol t category A land and.t[3],24,8501- for category B.liland, respectively. t 18..: I may note here that in various land acquisition references, various parties haye pro'ved a number of sa.le deeds executed from timei to time, but during Frguments toddy before me,.learned counsel for the. land owners have gnly relieil upon the sale deed Ex.P-l.
19. Per contra, Sh.Sanjay Poddar lEarned counsel "for the' UOI would urge that the sale price as per Ex.P-1 cannot be adopted as the yardstick;.for the rea.Son,'to be a representative sample of the whole, the sample rnqs.t bear some, adequate proportion to the 'whole. For example, learned counsel. would urge that if it has to be determined whether what perce'ntage'of stones are mixed in a bag of rice it would not be a iafe method td pick only one grain, for if it happens'to be the grain of rice' one would lead to the conclusion thatthe bag is 100% full of rice and.if that one grain happens to be a pibce of stone, one would reach to the conclusion that the bag is full of stones. At least a fistfui should be lifted and then checked:'as a re.preseritative sample, is- the example given. Th.e second reason on which': | !,- --' learned counsel would 'attack the. sale, deed as not being representative of the pricg is the reason that people do com.e to kpow about pending acquisition inasmuch as before a-cquisitions are made, land in the area is surveyed. Without a. Survey it. would be difficult to issue even the notification.uncier'section 4; LA.APP.[7] 8412005 & connected Page 11 of19.,: /] r-" - \gf tfre Lln"d Acquis'ition Agt. LearneQ.counsel rwou.ld.$gf"d:,phat the ieasons given by the learned Reference Co,urt ffi not' "'' t.ibund, but would urge,that the two..contentions advanqed by.. him should be considered,by this Court as the'reasons'ai qolwhV t".lli Ex.p-l be not taken as the basis to determine the fair rharket. "l.value of.lands in.village Mundka and Bakkarwala. ]hirdly, iearned co.unsel would further urge that.the four sale deeds:'" Ex.R-1, to R-4 referred "to in the decision of the,learnqd I Reference Court pertaining to sale deeds dated 6.1,1995, -.'.
30.5. L997, 4.6.1997. and.8.9.1997 relied, upon by UOI would show the actual market value of the land. and'thus learned ' counsel would urge that'lhe said fou.r saie deeds'should be " "considered,' but hastens..to add, that since' value reflected, i. therein is less than the minimum price. notified. by.. the. Government, the price fixation should. be with reference to the ',. minimumpricenotifiedbytheGovernmentwhichisnearestto. the point bt tirne when the respective notifications were issued. '1. under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. ' ':' - 20. An independ"", u-,ij l-";;t.iu" trsrment'is latro 1",, advanced by learned counsel.for the Union, The Same rests itself on q decision of a Division Bench of this Court repo'rteij as 2O0Q (135) DLT 23I lai Sinah Vs. UOl. 2L. 'The decision in lai Sinqh's case (supra). c.on,cerns- itself. with the deterrnination of the fair market value of land in village Bakkarwala which were acquiied pursuant to a'noiification da.ted 15.10.1993 at {1,32;000/- per bigha' LeArned cou.nset would urge that the said decision has attained finality inasmuch:[.A.APP.78412005 & co n necte.g Page t[2] of L[9].. ''; 'i,J, '..'r'-{'f I t ii tf {. i ', t "'.,i' as Pelitions for f pecial Leave to Appgal filed before the SyPfem|,. Learned. counsgl takes.the argument forward by Urging that by adoptingiittre fairi,ouit.t value of land in village Bakkarwaia as of 15'110'1993 at T[1];32.,000/- per bigha,' the faii market value should "be ascbrtained by increasing the prige prog'ressively by.7:',0% Per: annum to determine the market value' of land in..'village Bakkbrwala as of 24.g,2003 as also !7.6.2005' 'Lqarned-"counsel would urge that in view of the locational advaltaOe of vilibge Mundka, fair market value of land in village Munijka should be determined as of,25.2.1gg[7],2I.3.2003 and 17 '6'2005, by giving 5% increase -l h recnorf to th 'l '! - - -' -x,P-l, wheretlndei 1
22. With resPect to the sale deed c; bigha and 3 biswa of,agric,ultural land wa[5] sold 'in Village Mund,ka as of 5.g.1996, it would assume importance that the saie is aboirt 7 months prior to the date of the notification issl'ed. under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition'Act, which was is,suedioh
25.2. Lgg[7]. lt is a matter of common k"nowledge that'preceding the publication of. a notification under Secti'oh 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, survey.;s are cariied out with. the object gf d,etermining'as to what lands, comprised in whiqh khasrp numbers arad fieldb are iequired to be notifidd ror the,proposed acquisition and when this happens people in the area'come to,know lhat very soon there is every tikelihood that the lands would De.-acquired. ln Delhi,. the large scale acquisition. policy enjoinq.1;pon ti" co"Lrnment'to allot, at pre determined'ratei, a '.lit:' ', --^''-'-r-.^-^ 'lli., ' plot cif."'-{eveloped lesidential land,to the.ones whose-lands Pt", ' tl'tr --^:<t ^cc[6]:" ' 1. I.--^-+arr Paee'13 of 19 n.npp,zai12p05&connected ' ''. ut, i.-q: I \F _ir i;ti, t.:\ t 'I ': t. ' '! ' 'f.'. ). r*.i VJ;. 't ' o;i '' \ tj T i t t,-N ' t. 'r ': acquired,ffi thus, it is.not uncominQn, f6r'persons to purchase ';;,,;r& of tanos in areas where acquisitions are likelv to I;;-" ilJdlihese traniactions are specutative an{ Lannot be' taken to berS representative measure of the fair market'value of " land as qh,$lre date of the sale, Further, the' principlest of ratiol' and prqpq$io,n as also. the principles; of averag'es and the: i \,,: princip|esQ[isamp|ingtet|nrethattoberepresentaitiveofthe.. r." - il';: rr at intelligibie proportion to the' whole, a Sbmpte must. bear at Intelllglor r ^_ --^r rt.!Y -t whole. ThUS, not for the reasoning advanf vvl lvrv. ',."1:[r, Referencg ffiUn, but for the twin reasonins hith.en:-.l: T[1].,.^* l\El l-l vr rvv f';7.;-' -. '- '.:-l:l) ' hold' thati;trift;t-t cannot be.go.od evidence wherefrom mlrtcef';;;".; t,$:i..0 courd oe determined. rhere is an additional.,it tl '. r- r^:l rha crla daads FX..R' '"rr";-."it[6], rely upon the said sale deed' The::'" o:,"^o::i': i,"tr_ R-4,'dared g.1.r9g[5], 30.5.t997; 4'6,rgg[7] and 8.9.!997 -l^ ^-iaa t,.[1] 's I 'l I I,-r-, -r. nr; pertaining to Vitiage Mundka and reflect,a sale price' ce recorded in Ex"P-]l' In 'fact' the much lo.wer than the,sale Pri. r: ': deeds aVerages much less than sale Price in the said 4 sale,. eventheminimumprice.foragriculturalIan.dinDelhinotifiedby' theGovernment.,, j
23. Thus, the fair market value of the lands would bq required tp bg fixed either with refeience'to the decision'of this Court in'lal Sinah'scase (supra ) or Pratap'1inah's case (supra)' 24-rhighlightthat'bothdecisionsipenn€dbv*:oi:'tion' BenchofthisCourthavebeenupheidbytheSupremeC.ourt. 25'Thedecisionin|aisinq.h,scase(supra).de:ermined fair market value of land in Vil'iage' Bakkarwala in sum of. {1,32,000/-'per bigha as,of 15:10'1993' qnd the 'perusal'thereof,' LA..APP.784/2005 & connected;, lr would show that the Goupt assgssed the faiiimarket,value.with;:: ' i,reference to sale deeds:dxecuted between the yFars\.1990 till the year 1996 either in Village Tikr| Kalan or Vil:lage Mtlndka, -?tt- ^-'---apparently on the premise thpt being contigrjous"villagers, sale price of agricultural lA,nd in the.2" adjoining villages would be. indicative of fair market'vqlue of land in Village EaKKaryalq
26. ln PratAp Sinah's case (supra), the. Division'Bench, a was concerned with agiicultural la.nds in Tikri Kalan and another adjoining ' Village 'named Ghevra and pertainin'g to;Various I notifications issued under Section 4. of [he Land Acquis.ition Act 't determined the fair market value of agricultural Iands jn Village Tikri Kalan and Ghevra as under:- ':
27. ' ' 'Following the judgm'ent in PratAb Srnqhis ca'sd {'supra)..[1] have decided the fair market value for the. land situated in, revenue estate of Villa'ge Ghevra, which was QcQuired pursuant. to notification dated 6.2.2003 in the batch of appeals being land' LA.APP.[7] 84/2005 & connected Rage 15 of 19,i s, N o.. "Date Village Price pe-r Bigha
1. 24.07.1995 & 16.11.1995 Tikri Kalan {2,15,160/.rfoi Block A & T[1],73,500/- for Block B land 2" 11 06.1996 Tikri, Kalan & Ghevra:.T[2],35,Bl-5l- for Block A & {1,90, 1561- for Block B ldnd
3. L[7].72.2002 Tikri Kal'an;l <4,02,850/-'for Block A & <3,24',,85'Ol- for Block B land, I i"LE t,' Acq u is iti o n np p e a l N o' 4 B?/2.0 0 9, ch i ra n.i i ta !. vft U q i o n.?f!:t|:?.,.u. a,: -.rc1l. I have d-etermined the fair, nibrket value of thu.,. ffi;';i,-;,;;r;u{ *o,or, 425t- per oieira as or 6 2;2003' | | -.-.-,^l^.^ri$h ldlrur lrr v "'s:''. I of land in villaie Bakkarwala with. On the issue of compara'bility ot tan: rrt ll": '' village Mundka, Ghevra and Tikri Kalan' tt I whereasvil|ageBakkarwa|adoes,notabutNH-10,as.dothe,.,: otherviltages,butit,hastobe-'highlightedtna{'it't,.,1-",::; proximate to the yrban breas of Delhi vis-d-vis' Ghevra and Tikri:' ') Kalanandto.i".eitent,quasaid2'villageS,ha:.anadva.!:g:: Since exactness can never be aghieved 'in the' matters of': { assessing fair compensation, it' is the broad probabilities ulo...j j. simitarities which matter',' l.l,t_r'^l]:;:^' ihown,'.:. I land sPecial features can oe': equivalent, unless qua sPme \
28. Since the decision in' Pratap 'Sinah's casS Isu11a) I --s^ i^ ^nint nf fime tO tne; - rtifications more proximate in. point of time to the,,.. deals wrtn t"':::::,:,-";; rm or rhe opinion rhar,; notificatiorrs with which l am cpncerned' I t-' "'- ^-t.^+- i t nofllrLdLrurr> vv per to detefmine.the fair market- l it would,be just' fair and prc ' 'r rgration.to the fair, jr ' '', value of 'lands with which l am concerneo lr value oT ldll(J> vvrLrr YY marketvalueoflandsdeterminedinPrattt^5Jnah,s..u'"'l:"i:1: ffi;;";,1on-in P*tun sion'' case it::t:'-l::j::i:::;;.;.;t"n,; a-t"go'v A lands fair':compensation assessed was {2,1s,I6Ql- per bisha and {1'73'500/- per' bisha fgr tiillll. l' )n with 'which I am concerned is lan'd. Th.e'first notification wltn wtlrLll.25.2:IggTwhereunderlandsinVilIageMundkaWe[eacquired.The time span sweeps l vear and zto divs i'e' 58,tr-]1];.[1] " r rf s Lrr"v "Y-" lse was detgrminbd PrataBflnghJcase (supia) the annual indei n ffiT1^:_;;".-}o',*.Thus,pertainingt9Category[4] tO be IUYT per dlrr rur I I '\'r'us/'. 'i,, eage f'O of.f[9] f )age 16 of'19 j ' -g | ' LA.App.784/2005&connected.,'i,.::'l::l.,t, l lands, the fair'market'valqre assessed is.t2"49,408'15 per: bighb,. " i.e. T11,[9] 7;]621- pe|" acre ano.for Category B lands, l assess the, fair market value at {2,01,7171- per 'bigha i.'e' {9'65'361'60 pe'r: '-..',. 29,.. The next notification with w,hich I am concerned-.'tS'. acre. a! t datted 27,3.2003 pertaining to Village. Mun'dka ' lit.chiranii Ldl's '.u, (supra), with reference to the decisio'n in Prata. (supra), for agricultural"lands in Village Ghevra'pertaining to a., notification issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Ait. on 6.2.2003, the fdir market value assessed was't[4],03,4251- per bigha.. This. was u.r-rifdrmly applied. Since there is a time'gap of''..! just a little bver f monttr, I a6n of the opinion thdt pertaining tp' the notification dated 2L[3].2003, fair rna.nket value of land in: ilr;" vrrngr.a should be t[4],03,4zsl- i.e. T19,[3] 6,4'4ol- p'gr acre'.. which I herePY fix.; i 30, l, propose to dea[ with ihg notifisatio-n datqd'^,iththenotificationdatedTT'.6.'2005 ' 24.:9.2003, after dealing,w,:. pursuant whereto agiicultura! lands we.re acquired il viltan". ' Mundka and Village Bakkarwala' 3l..Asnotedhereinabove,inChiraniiLal,scase(supra), pertaining to the notification dated 6.2'.2003, fair market value' ', ': A[1] A' assessed by me was {4,03,425/-.per bigha and thus, increasing;;;rr" b; L0% for 2 years and 13] days, the f.igure comes to {4,.98,589/-perbighd,whichcomestot23'g3'227'20peracfe' The same is held by me'to be the fair'market value of land.in Vilage Mundka and Village Bakkarwala as of 17'6'2005' I dqcree t.. 'l ! I I I the same. LA.APP.[7] 84 12005 & co n nected.:l Page L[7].of t[9] 32.'.lamleft,wi!h'thenotificationdated'24'g'2003 i pertaini6rg to Villuge Bakkarwala an.d with,reference t[9] itrg fajr ': '. ma.rket valub assessed in Chiranti Lal's.case' I would rpquire t[9] t' -*r.. "te the price by 10% per annum for a period 9{ 2Of: days" the figure comes [o <4,25,64U- per bigha i.e. {20,43,b76.'80 per, acre, which I determine to be the fair market value'of land in' ' ? +'9'2003 Village BaKkarwala as of 2' -.[6]
33. ' Accordingly, Jhe appeals filed' by the Union of lndp l*".:-:^^^: me. lt$; require.tobedismissed'andlherebydismisstheSa appeals filed by the'land owners and the cross-objections filed' by the land owners stands Qecreed as under:- ', I ' --!^-^,r, n lrnA in.\'/illahe i' i) For tl$ land fqlling in Category A land in Village ': rvrundt& the r;ir 'market 'value is fixed at 'is i <2,4g,40g.75 per bigha i.e. T 1.L:97,1621-.per aicre'and- ". forCategoryBlands,thefairmbrketvalueisfixedat.,,ii).'12,0t,tI7l- per bigha'i.e. {9,6.5,361'6p per acre' as on 25.02'.Lgg[7]; ';.,1' For the land situated',in Village Mundka th'e fair '.urket value is fixed at t[4],03,4251.- per nigha i:ei {19,36,[4] 40l- per acre, as'on 2!'03'2003'.: i For the land situated. i,n. Village Mundka; the fair rharket valu'e,is. fixed at. t[4],98,5891- per bigha i'": {23, 93,227.20 per acre, as on 17 '06'2005:: iii) iv) For the land 'markei: value ' in.Village Bakkarwala the at t[4],98,5891--Per bigha i.. i' situated, is fixed fair t.e. in.ppP.l eq/2005 & connected.i: il i T23,93,227.20 per'acne, as pn t[7].06.209.[5] l. I 'u).For'the land situated,in Vil'iage Fakkajrwala:!h'e fa.ir the prayers made th'eiein, I,IULV 08, 2011 t' mm,i I n.e7e:l A+12005 & connEcted !t, ma,rket valu'e iS fixed at {4,25,.Q4U-"per. bigha'i'e' <20,43,.076.,80 per acre, asron 24.09'.200?..', Appellants and cross-objeqops who hav$'suc,ieeded would also be entitled to s.olatium and i"ntbret! ?s,per.,. statute and a5' clarified in the decision. rePo,rted as 93(2001) DLT 569 Sunder vs. tJOl, f-or the tl compensation,.paid originally and as enhan"ced by the Reference, court.and finally"on the sum enhanced by the.present iudgment and dec;ee. rellant"s a.nd'cross-dbjegtors who succeed. would also be entitleci to.proportiqnate costs" vi,ii) All pending applications stand disposed of in terms of (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG) JUDGE I:.: I t frr I:' se 19.of 19