9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (9) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000/ per acre for the remaining land in 'B' block. Feeling dissatisfied with the compensation awarded the landowners preferred a number of references which were all consolidated for trial by the learned Additional District Judge, Hissar. The solitary issue framed therein on merits was with regard to the compensation to be awarded to the landholders and it is the common case that in this set of appeals also this very question is the only one which fails for determination. 3. On behalf of the landowner-claimants as many as 11 instances of sale transactions in the vicinity Exhibits P. 1 to P. 11 were brought on record. In rebuttal the respondent-State relied on copies of registered sale deeds and mutations R. W. 1/2 to R. W. 1/13 being instances of transfers of land in the adjoining areas. Apart from these oral testimony of witnesses was also adduced. The learned Additional District Judge on a consideration of the whole record enhanced the compensation in block 'A' to ₹ 9000/- and that of block 'B' to ₹ 6000/- per acre Apart from awarding the statutory solatium at the rate of 15 per cent he also directed that interest at the rate of 6 per cent be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the learned Additional District Judge has observed as follows in para-20 of his judgment:-- The learned Government Pleader has, also drawn my attention towards the judgment dated 20-2-1978 passed by the learned District Judge, Hissar, according to which the market value of the acquired land was held to be ₹ 5,000/per acre. I regret my inability to agree with the learned Government Pleader that the said judgment Exhibit P.W. 1/14 may be followed. In para No. 8 of the said judgment the learned District Judge has clearly observed that the claimant had not brought on record satisfactory evidence in support of his assertion that the market price of acquired land was more than ₹ 5,000/- per acre. Whereas, in the case in hand the claimants have brought on record as many as 8 sale deeds of the pear 1973, pertaining to the months of March, July and December. Besides this they have also brought a sale deed dated 21-1-1972. and two sale deeds pertaining to October and November 1975. Therefore, the evidence in this case cannot be treated at par to that which led in the case before the learned District Judge in which judgment Exhibit P.W..1/14 was passed It is unnecessar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ature to have the same meaning it is difficult to comprehend why the word compensation in Sections 28 and 34 and not market value was used. The key to s the meaning of the word compensation is to be found in Section 23(1) and that consists (a) of the market value of the land and (b) the sum of 15% on such I market value which is stated to be the consideration for the compulsory nature of the acquisition. Market value is there-fore only one of the components in the determination of the amount of compensation......... 10. Once it is held as it inevitably must be that the solatium provided for under Section 23(2) of the Act forms an integral and statutory part of the compensation awarded to a landowner, then from the plain terms of Section 28 of the Act, it would be evident that the interest is payable on the compensation awarded and not merely on the market value of the land. Indeed the language of S. 28 does not even remotely refer to market value alone and in terms talks of compensation or the sum equivalent thereto. The interest awardable under Section 28 therefore would include within its ambit both the market value and the statutory solatium. It would be thus evident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s which have not been at all challenged by the learned Advocate General, Haryana, and he did not indeed press for their acceptance. That being so, one is inevitably left to assess the market value on the acceptable sale instances P. 4, P. 7 and P. 8 noticed above. All these three instances of sale on the 30th of March, 1973, are barely a month or more prior to the material date of acquisition on the 1st day of May, 1973. Their proximity in time is thus self-evident. They pertained to sizable area of land and the bona fides of the transactions are not even remotely in dispute. A reference to the site plan would show that they are not at all far removed by way of location and indeed' from that angle also provide a fair standard of comparable land. Inevitably one has to conclude that the fair market value indicated therefrom comes to the round figure of ₹ 12,000/- per acre. As has been noticed earlier there is no justification for the two blocks created by the Collector and maintained by the Additional District Judge. Land has, therefore, to be compensated at a uniform rate and the aforesaid market value appears to be the true assessment thereof. 14. It deserves recalling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
