Radhey Sham Versus The State of Haryana and Others

Radhey Sham Versus The State of Haryana and Others 

Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले



REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7391 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. /2022 @
Diary No. 17442/2022)
Radhey Sham …Appellant
Versus
The State of Haryana and Others …Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7372 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 14374/2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7371 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 15110/2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7204-7222 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18065-83 /2022 @
Diary No. 30556/2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7346-7349 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18404-7 /2022 @
Diary No. 20177/2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7223-7230 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No.18086-93/2022 @
Diary No. 30644/2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7233-7234 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18094-95/2022 @
Diary No. 30715/2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7373-7390 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18408-25 /2022 @
Diary No. 27043/2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7350 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18403 /2022 @
Diary No. 21596/2022)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7351-7370 OF 2022
(Arising from SLP(Civil) No. 18383-402/2022 @
Diary No. 26794/2022)
J U D G M E N T
1
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common
judgment and order dated 04.03.2022 passed by the High Court of
Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in R.F.A. No. 2016/2021 and other
allied First Appeals, by which the High Court has allowed the said First
Appeals preferred by the respondents herein – State of Haryana and
others and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order dated
31.05.2014 passed by the Reference Court and has restored the awards
declared by the Land Acquisition Collector determining the amount of
compensation with respect to the lands acquired at village Hansi and
Dhana, District Hisar, Haryana, the original landowners have preferred
the present appeals.
2. The facts leading to the present appeals in a nutshell are as under:
That the land situated at village Hansi and Dhana, District Hisar,
Haryana admeasuring 229.13 acres and 20.77 acres respectively came
to be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act 1894’) for development of the
residential and commercial sectors – Sectors 3, 5 & 6 at Hansi. A
common notification under Section 4 of the Act 1894 was issued on
29.08.2005. That declaration under Section 6 of the Act 1894 was
issued on 29.08.2006. The land Acquisition Collector declared the
2
award under Section 11 of the Act 1894 on 3.8.2007, vide award Nos. 1
& 2 for both villages, Hansi & Dhana, by adopting the belting
method/system and assessed the market value of the land abutting the
G.T. Road (Delhi-Hisar Road) at Rs. 12,00,000/- per acre up to the depth
of 2 acres and for the land abutting the Jind By-pass Road, at Rs.
10,00,000/- per acre up to the depth of 2 acres and for the remaining
land, the market value was assessed at Rs. 8,00,000/- per acre.
2.1 That at the instance of the landowners, the references were made
to the Reference Court. By common judgment and order dated
31.05.2014, the Reference Court allowed the respective reference
petitions filed by the landowners and assessed the market value at
Rs.1,000/- per square yard (Rs. 48,20,000/- per acre).
2.2 Having not satisfied with the amount of compensation determined
by the Reference Court, the landowners preferred first appeals before
the High Court for enhancement of compensation. At this stage, it is
required to be noted that so far as the State is concerned, the State
accepted the common judgment and order dated 31.05.2014 passed by
the Reference Court determining the amount of compensation/market
value of the acquired land at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard. That the High
Court, by common judgment and order dated 28.05.2016 passed in RFA
No. 7324/2014 and other allied first appeals, allowed the said first
appeals preferred by the landowners and assessed the market value of
3
the acquired land at Rs. 4,173/- per square yard, relying upon the
decision of this Court in the case of Ashrafi and Others v. State of
Haryana and Others, (2013) 5 SCC 527.
2.3 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the common judgment and
order passed by the High Court dated 28.05.2016 passed in RFA No.
7324/2014 and other allied first appeals, the original landowners as well
as the State preferred appeals before this Court. By judgment and order
dated 16.05.2018, this Court allowed the appeals preferred by the State
and set aside the judgment and order dated 28.05.2016 passed by the
High Court and remitted the matter to the High Court for fresh
consideration. While setting aside the judgment and order dated
28.05.2016 passed by the High Court, this Court observed that the High
Court committed an error in determining compensation at Rs. 4,173/- per
square yard, considering the decision of this Court in the case of
Ashrafi (supra). This Court observed that as the land in the case of
Ashrafi (supra) was acquired in the year 1995 and was a very small
piece of land and it was for a commercial purpose and in the present
case the land has been acquired in the year 2005 and thus there is a
gap of about 10 years between the two acquisitions, relying on such an
acquisition of a decade ago may be unsafe.
2.4 That thereafter on remand, the High Court vide common judgment
and order dated 28.08.2019 remitted the matter to the Reference Court
4
by observing that some sale instances/sale exemplars relied upon on
behalf of the landowners were not taken into consideration by the
Reference Court. Therefore, the High Court remanded the matter to the
Reference Court by observing that it would be appropriate that the
Reference Court as such examines the issue threadbare and after
examining the sale deeds produced from both sides comes to the
conclusion that what is the correct market value.
2.5 That thereafter on remand, the Reference Court assessed the
amount of compensation at Rs. 750/- per square yard. The common
judgment and order passed by the Reference Court on remand
assessing the compensation/market value at Rs. 750/- per square yard
was the subject matter before the High Court at the instance of the
landowners as well as the State. By the impugned common judgment
and order, the High Court has dismissed the appeals preferred by the
landowners and allowed the appeals preferred by the State and has
restored the award passed by the Land Acquisition Collector. By the
impugned common judgment and order passed by the High Court, the
amount of compensation is reduced between Rs. 166/- per square yard
to Rs. 200/- per square yard.
2.6 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common
judgment and order passed by the High Court, the original landowners
have preferred the present appeals.
5
3. We have heard learned Senior Advocates/counsel appearing on
behalf of the respective original landowners and Shri Alok Sangwan,
learned Additional Advocate General along with Dr. Monilka Gusain,
learned counsel for the State of Haryana.
3.1 Learned Senior Advocates/counsel appearing on behalf of the
original landowners have vehemently submitted that as such the State
accepted the earlier judgment and order dated 31.05.2014 passed by
the Reference Court determining the market value at Rs. 1,000/- per
square yard and the landowners preferred appeals before the High Court
for enhancement of compensation. It is submitted that once the State
accepted the earlier judgment and order passed by the Reference Court,
allowing the reference petitions, and determining the market value at
Rs.1,000/- per square yard, the landowners are entitled to the
compensation at least at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard.
3.2 It is submitted that even while disposing of the appeals by this
Court in the common judgment and order dated 16.05.2018, this Court
also specifically observed that the State had not preferred appeals
and/or challenged the judgment and order dated 31.05.2014 passed by
the Reference Court and the original landowners preferred appeals for
enhancement. It is therefore submitted that in that view of the matter,
the High Court ought not to have allowed the appeals preferred by the
State and reduced the amount of compensation below Rs. 1,000/- per
6
square yard, which as such was accepted by the State Government by
not preferring appeals at the relevant time.
3.3 Some of the learned Senior Advocates/counsel appearing on
behalf of the original landowners have taken us to the sale deeds
produced by the landowners. Relying upon those sale deeds, it is
submitted that the claimants shall be entitled to the amount of
compensation at more than Rs.1,000/- per square yard.
4. While opposing the present appeals, learned Additional Advocate
General appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently submitted that
once the matter was remanded by this Court to the High Court and
thereafter by the High Court to the Reference Court for fresh decision,
even thereafter the Reference Court assessed the amount of
compensation at Rs. 750/- per square yard, vide common judgment and
order dated 29.01.2020. It is therefore submitted that merely because at
the relevant time and for whatever reasons the State did not prefer
appeals against the judgment and order passed by the Reference Court
dated 31.05.2014 determining the compensation/market value at Rs.
1,000/- per square yard, the original landowners shall not be entitled to
the compensation at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard.
4.1 It is submitted that by the impugned common judgment and order,
the High Court has considered the sale deeds relied upon by the State
as well as the sale deeds relied upon by the landowners and thereafter
7
has come to the conclusion that the landowners have failed to produce
any convincing evidence to prove that the award passed by the Land
Acquisition Collector was erroneous. It is submitted that therefore no
error has been committed by the High Court in allowing the appeals
preferred by the State and in upholding the two different awards passed
by the Land Acquisition Collector.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length
and considering the facts and circumstances narrated hereinabove, we
are of the firm opinion that the landowners shall be entitled to the
compensation considering the market value of the acquired land at least
at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard as per the earlier judgment and order
dated 31.05.2014 passed by the Reference Court. It is required to be
noted and it is not in dispute that so far as the State Government is
concerned, the State did not challenge the common judgment and order
dated 31.05.2014 passed by the Reference Court assessing the market
value of the acquired land at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard and it was the
landowners who preferred appeals before the High Court for
enhancement of the amount of compensation. It is also required to be
noted that non-filing of the appeals by the State against the common
judgment and order dated 31.05.2014 was also taken note of by this
Court while disposing of the appeals vide common judgment and order
dated 16.05.2018.
8
6. Even otherwise, on a fair reading of the judgment and order dated
16.05.2018 passed by this Court and the subsequent order dated
28.08.2019 passed by the High Court, the matter was remanded to the
Reference Court to consider the sale deeds for the purpose of
enhancement of the amount of compensation, while considering the sale
deeds relied upon by the landowners. In any case, once the judgment
and order passed by the Reference Court dated 31.05.2014 determining
the compensation at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard attained finality so far
as the State is concerned, the landowners shall be entitled to the
compensation at least at Rs. 1,000/- per square yard.
7. Now so far as the submission on behalf of the original landowners
to enhance the amount of compensation beyond Rs. 1,000/- per square
yard is concerned, we have gone through and considered the sale
deeds relied upon on behalf of the landowners. Most of the sale deeds
relied upon by the landowners are much prior to the date of Section 4
notification (ranging between 1992 to 1994). Some of the sale deeds
are post Section 4 notification. Only three to four sale deeds are nearer
to Section 4 notification. However, all those sale deeds are with respect
to small area of lands and even the price is also at variance. Therefore,
it is not safe to determine the compensation relying upon those sale
deeds which are nearer to Section 4 notification.
9
8. In view of the above and for the reasons state above, we are of the
firm opinion that the claimants/landowners shall be entitled to
compensation of the acquired land at least at Rs. 1,000/- per square
yard. It is reported that the State has already deposited/paid the
compensation at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per square yard which is now
sought to be recovered pursuant to the impugned common judgment
and order passed by the High Court restoring the awards passed by the
Land Acquisition Collector determining the compensation/market value
ranging from Rs. 166/- per square yard to Rs. 200/- per square yard.
9. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, all these
appeals succeed in part. The impugned common judgment and order
dated 4.3.2022 restoring the awards passed by the Land Acquisition
Collector dated 3.8.2007 is hereby quashed and set aside. It is held that
the original landowners/claimants shall be entitled to the compensation
considering the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 1,000/- per
square yard.
10. All these appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent. No costs.
……………………………………..J.
[M.R. SHAH]
NEW DELHI; ……………………………………..J.
OCTOBER 17, 2022. [C.T. RAVIKUMAR]
10

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