BHAG SINGH ETC. VS UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

BHAG SINGH ETC. VS UNION OF INDIA & ANR.


Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले


REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4070-4075 OF 2012
BHAG SINGH ETC.
 .....APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....RESPONDENT(S)
W I T H
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4076-4082 OF 2012
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4086 OF 2012
A N D
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 4083-4084 OF 2012
J U D G M E N T
HEMANT GUPTA, J.
1. The present appeals are directed against orders dated 2.8.2010 and
21.12.2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at
Chandigarh whereby the appeals of the land owners and that of the
Union were dismissed, maintaining the compensation of Rs.4 lakhs per
acre awarded by the learned Additional District Judge, Rupnagar in
1
reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 18941
.
2. The notification dated 26.10.1990 was published intending to acquire
32 acres 6 kanal and 3 marlas of land in Village Sohana and 90 acres 7
kanal and 18 marlas of land in Village Lakhnaur. The said notification
was followed by a notification dated 6.11.1991 issued under Section 6
of the Act. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation of
Rs.1,75,000/- per acre. Aggrieved by the market value determined by
the Land Acquisition Collector, the land owners sought reference under
Section 18 of the Act. The Reference Court awarded compensation of
Rs.4 lakhs per acre apart from the compensation for super-structures.
The said award of the amount of compensation was based upon a
judgment dated 11.10.2002 (Ex.P/13) by the Reference Court
pertaining to the same notification in respect of land situated in Village
Lakhnaur.
3. Mr. Rameshwar Singh Malik, learned senior counsel appearing for the
land owners in Civil Appeal Nos. 4076-4082 of 2012 and Civil Appeal
Nos. 4083-4084 of 2012 argued that in respect of land acquired vide
subsequent notification dated 25.7.1991 for the land situated in Village
Sohana, the Reference Court had awarded a compensation of
Rs.5,96,000/- and in respect of another notification dated 11.11.1993,
in respect of land situated in Village Sohana, the Reference Court has
awarded Rs.6,96,000/- per acre. It was further contended that in terms
1 For short, the ‘Act’
2
of acquisition of land vide notification dated 27.9.1988 of Village
Kambali, Rs.5,96,000/- per acre was awarded as compensation by the
Reference Court which was affirmed by the High Court in first appeal.
The present acquisition is more than 2 years later, therefore, the land
owners are entitled to compensation on the basis of the amount of
compensation awarded by the High Court in addition to the increase in
prices for the period of 2 years. It was argued that Village Kambali and
Village Sohana are adjoining villages, therefore, the market value
determined in respect of Village Kambali is a reasonable yardstick for
determination of the compensation in respect of land situated in
Village Sohana.
4. On behalf of the State, it was argued that total land admeasuring 123
acres 6 kanals 1 marla was subject matter of acquisition vide
notification dated 26.10.1990 out of which 262 kanals and 3 marlas is
the land situated in Village Sohana and 728 kanals and 6 marlas of
land is situated in Village Lakhnaur. Out of the total land acquired, 49
acres 4 kanals and 18 marlas have been utilized by the Union for the
purpose of Border Security Force whereas the rest of the land has been
utilized by the State. The Reference Court has relied upon
determination of compensation vide Ex.P/13 in respect of land in
Village Lakhnaur which is part of the same notification by which the
land in Village Sohana was acquired. Therefore, the award of market
value of land by the Reference Court, as affirmed by the High Court,
3
does not suffer from any error or illegality.
5. The appellants have filed a Lay-out Plan (Annexure P/20) before this
Court. It shows that the land situated in Village Sohana and Village
Mataur are close to each other whereas land situated at Village
Kambali and kambala are at quite a distance located near the
Chandigarh International Airport. As per Map of Survey of India, the
village Kumbra is the next village located on east of village Sohana
whereas village Mouli is situated on south-east of Sohana. Village
Kambala is further away from Mauli. Kambali is located further on
south-east. The distance from Sohana to Kambala and Kambali is more
than 2 kms. Therefore, the compensation awarded for the land
situated at Village Kambali cannot be considered as a reasonable
yardstick for determining the market value of land situated in Village
Sohana.
6. The land of Village Sohana has been subject matter of acquisition for a
number of times. First acquisition was in pursuance of a notification
date 4.2.1981 under Section 4 of the Act. In respect of such land
acquired in Village Mataur and Sohana, the compensation awarded by
the High Court was Rs.1,25,000/- per acre vide Ex.P/8.
7. Another notification under Section 4 of the Act was published on
25.7.1991 in respect of acquisition of Land situated in Village Sohana.
Compensation of Rs.5,96,000/- per acre was awarded by the learned
4
Reference Court relying upon the determination of compensation of
land acquired in Village Kambali wherein the High Court in State of
Punjab v. Mohinder Singh & Ors.
2
 awarded compensation @
Rs.5,96,000/- per acre. The High Court’s judgment was based upon the
fact that Village Kambali and Village Sohana are adjoining to each
other and in close proximity. The award of the Reference Court is
subject matter of challenge before the High Court in RFA No. 1786 of
2000 at the instance of the State and is pending final decision. The
land owners have filed cross-objections in the said appeal.
8. Thereafter, the land situated at Village Sohana was also acquired vide
notification dated 11.11.1993. The Reference Court awarded
Rs.6,96,000/- per acre. However, the amount of compensation was
enhanced to Rs.8 lakhs per acre in Harbachan Kaur & Ors. v. State
of Punjab
3
 vide order dated 23.8.2006.
9. In respect of land acquired vide notification under Section 4 of the Act
dated 26.10.1990, the Reference Court relied upon determination of
compensation vide Ex.P/13 by the Reference Court in respect of land in
Village Lakhnaur which forms part of the same notification by which
the land in Village Sohana was acquired. The said award had attained
finality as no appeal was preferred against it.
10. The argument is that land situated in Village Kambali is situated in
close proximity of land situated in Sohana, therefore, compensation
2 RFA No. 625 of 1994
3 RFA No. 2322 of 1998
5
assessed by the High Court in Mohinder Singh can be treated as base
market value. As observed above, the two villages Kambali and Sohana
are not in close proximity but located at substantial distance as per the
Map of Survey of India as also the lay-out plan produced by the
landlord. Therefore, such judgment is not a helpful guide to determine
compensation.
11. Another appeal arising out of notification dated 25.7.1991 is pending
before the High Court. Therefore, it would not be proper to discuss the
said award of the Reference Court.
12. In respect of the land acquired vide notification dated 11.11.1993, the
High Court has awarded compensation @ Rs.8 lakhs per acre. The
argument is that suitable deduction should be made from such
determination of the market value of the land acquired vide notification
dated 26.10.1990.
13. The Reference Court as well as the High Court has given a finding of
fact that no sale instance produced by the parties are relevant for
determining the market value. Therefore, the only relevant basis is the
previous judgments.
14. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. It is an undisputed fact
that there is no sale instance in respect of land situated in Village
Sohana after the first notification dated 4.2.1981 till the notification in
question dated 26.10.1990. The absence of sale deeds shows that
there was no sale and purchase of the land which could show the
6
potentiality of use of the land for residential, commercial or industrial
purposes. The Village Kambali and Kambala are not adjoining to Village
Sohana as per the Lay Out plan produced by the appellants
themselves. The nearest village from Village Sohana is Mataur and not
Village Kambali or Kambala. Therefore, the market value determined in
respect of Village Kambali cannot be considered for determination of
compensation. Though, in respect of acquisition of land vide
notification dated 11.11.1993, the compensation assessed is Rs.8 lakhs
per acre which is more than two years later and in between, there is
acquisition of land vide notification dated 25.7.1991.
15. The question now is as to whether determination of market value
subsequent to the notification would be relevant to determine the
market value of the land acquired more than two years earlier. We find
that though appreciation in price can be presumed, but the market
value cannot be assessed by applying suitable deduction in the market
value of the land acquired by a subsequent notification. When the later
notification is issued, the development activities had already been
taken place in view of the earlier two notifications. Therefore, it is not
the percentage of increase in the market value but increase due to the
development which has taken place on account of earlier notifications.
Therefore, market value of the land cannot be based upon the land
acquired vide notification dated 11.11.1993 i.e., more than two years
later of the notification in question and when there were other
notifications intervening on 26.10.1990 and 25.7.1991.
7
16. Alternatively, even if we examine the market value of the land
acquired vide notification dated 4.2.1981 in Village Sohana after giving
yearly increase of 10% per annum, the increase in the base value
would be as under:
1981 1,25,000
1982 1,37,500
1983 1,51,250
1984 1,66,375
1985 1,83,012.5
1986 2,01,313.75
1987 2,21,445.12
1988 2,43,589.63
1989 2,67,948.59
1990 2,94,743.44
Rounded off 2,94,743/-
17. Thus, even then the market value is not mare than market value
determined by the High Court.
18. The Reference Court has awarded compensation of Rs.4 lakhs per acre
in respect of land situated in Village Lakhnaur, acquired vide the same
notification. Such determination has not been appealed against either
by the land owners or by the State. The High Court has rightly relied
upon such determination to assess the market value of the land at Rs.4
lakhs per acre. In view of the said fact, we do not find any error in the
orders passed by the High Court which may warrant interference in the
present appeals.
8
19. In view of the above discussion, we do not find any merit in the
appeals. The same are dismissed.
.............................................J.
(HEMANT GUPTA)
.............................................J.
(V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN)
NEW DELHI;
MAY 5, 2022.
9

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

100 Questions on Indian Constitution for UPSC 2020 Pre Exam

संविधान की प्रमुख विशेषताओं का उल्लेख | Characteristics of the Constitution of India

भारतीय संविधान से संबंधित 100 महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न उतर