Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rohtas And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 14 December, 2022

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)
and other connected cases                1



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                    RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)
                    Date of decision: 14.12.2022
                    Reserved on 17.11.2022
Rohtas and others
                                               ....Appellants

            Versus

State of Haryana and others
                                              ..Respondents


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL

Present:    Mr. S.P.Chahar, Advocate
            for the landowners

            Sh.Shivendra Swaroop, AAG, Haryana

            Mr. Pritam Singh Saini, Advocate for the HSIIDC

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J

1.Background

and Introduction:-

1.1 While praying for the modification of the assessment of the

market value by the Reference Court's (hereinafter referred to as 'RC')

Award, dated 27th October, 2014, the landowners have filed this batch of

appeals. The notifications under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition

Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as '1894 Act') and the awards passed

by the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as 'LAC') and

the RC are common. Learned representing the parties are ad idem that

this batch of appeals (details whereof are at the foot of the judgment) can

conveniently be disposed of by a common order.

1 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

1.2 The relevant particulars of the acquisition, in brief, are as

under:-

      Sr.   Particulars                      Details

      No.
      1.    Date of notification             07.02.2008
            under Section 4
      2.    Declaration     under            23.06.2008
            Section 6
      3.    Date of LAC's award &            23.12.2008 (21)
            number
      4.    Amount awarded by                Rs.16,00,000/- per acre alongwith all
            LAC                              the statutory benefits
      5.    Area                             23 acres, 2 kanal, 8 marlas comprised
                                             in Rectangle no. 147, 157, 158, 175,
                                             186, 212 and 213
      6.    Village                          Badli
      7.    District                         Jhajjar
      8.    Purpose                          Construction       of     Expressway
                                             Highway no.1, 10, 8 and 2
      9.    Date of RC award                 27.10.2014
      10.   Amount awarded by RC             Rs.18,02,740/- per acre alongwith all
                                             the statutory benefits.          The
                                             landowners have also been held
                                             entitled to 20% market value as
                                             additional      compensation      for
                                             bifurcation of the land.


1.3         Dissatisfied with the amount offered by the LAC for the

involuntary acquisition of the land, on the applications of the

landowners, as many as 30 reference petitions were referred to the RC

for re-assessment of the market value. The landowners claim that the

acquired land falls within National Capital Region Project area and

forms part of the Jhajjar District, which is located near the Jhajjar Delhi

State Highway. The acquired land had the potential to be used for the

Industrial and Commercial purposes, and its market value was not less

than Rs.1.5 crore per acre. The acquired land was fertile, capable of

2 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

giving three crops a year. Many industries of international name and

fame, like Bharat Udyog Limited, Parle Limited, Somany, Pilkingdons

Limited etc. are located near the acquired land. The acquired land is

surrounded by many other factories and facilities like streets, water, road,

transport, hospitals, schools, etc. are available in and around the area. It

has been projected that with the construction of Kundali Manesar

Expressway (hereinafter referred to as 'KMP Expressway'), new avenues

of industrial and infrastructure development in the area would open up.

The market value of the land has experience sudden spur for the last two

years after the launch of Special economic zone policy by the Central

Government. Reliance India Company is developing a special economic

zone near the acquired land. The acquired land is located near the Garhi

Harsaru Railway Junction and the Gandhi International Airport, Delhi.

1.4 On the other hand, HSIIDC, while contesting the petitions

claimed that the LAC has examined all aspects of the matter before

offering the amount at the rate of Rs.16,00,000/- per acre, which is just,

fair and adequate.

2.Evidence produced by the respective parties:-

2.1 In oral evidence, the landowners, examined the following

witnesses:-

              PW1               Mahabir
              PW2               Dayanand
              PW3               Ram Kumar
              PW4               Satbir
              PW5               Ram Mehar
              PW6               Rohtash
              PW7               Jagbir


                                 3 of 14

 RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)


              PW8               Samunder            Singh,
                                Registry Clerk


2.2           In the documentary evidence, the landowners produced the

following documents, apart from the sale deeds, a tabulated compilation

whereof is in Para 4.2 of the judgment:-

      Ex.P1              Certified copy of sale deed
      Ex.P2              Mutation No.5587-A
      Ex.P3              Proceedings of meeting dated 18.11.2008
      Ex.P4              R&R Policy of Govt. of Haryana, 2007
      Ex.P5              R & R Policy of Govt. of Haryana, 2010
      Ex.P6              Certified copy of sale deed dated 17.3.2008
      Ex.P7              Site plan
      Ex.P8 to P25       Sale deeds
      Ex.P26 to P29      Certified copies of sale deeds


2.3           In the oral evidence, HSIIDC examined RW1 Rajeev Kumar

Manager.

3. Analysis of the reasons recorded in the impugned judgment:-

3.1 On appreciation of the pleadings, the RC culled out the

following issues for adjudication:-

"1. What is the market value of the acquired land? OPP

2. Whether the petitioner (s) is/are entitled for enhancement, if so, to what amount? OPP.

3. Relief."

3.2 The sale deeds Ex. P6, P7, P8, P9, P10, P11, P12, P13,

P14, P20, P21, P24, P25 were excluded from consideration by the RC as

these were the small sized properties relating to residential, commercial

plots and manure pits. The sale instances Ex.P 26 to P 29 were kept out

of consideration on the ground that these sale deeds relate to the parcels

4 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

of land located in Village Kassar. The sale instances Ex. P15 to P19, P21

to P23 were kept out of consideration on the ground that these parcels

have been purchased by the Reliance Haryana Limited. and normally

these big business houses purchase the property at a higher price than the

market value. Thereafter the RC relied upon the policy of the State

issued from time to time, while revising the floor rates of the land for

assessing the compensation. On the aforesaid basis the RC assessed the

market value of the acquired land at the rate of Rs.18,02,740/- per acre.

4. Discussion and Analysis of the arguments of the learned counsel representing the parties:-

4.1 Heard the learned counsel representing the parties at length

and with their able assistance perused the judgment passed by the RC

alongwith requisitioned record. On 17th November, 2022, with the

consent of the learned counsel representing the parties, a layout plan

prepared by an official of HSIIDC, indicating the location of the various

sale deeds produced by the parties vis-a-vis the acquired land was taken

on record as Ex. at HC1.

4.2 At this stage, it will be appropriate to draw a tabulated

compilation of the sale deeds produced by the landowners, which is

extracted as under:-

Sr. Ex.No Sale deed Descripti Area sold Sale Rate per Village No. and date on of the consideration acre land

1. P-1 5766 51// 2K 19 M 8,11,250 22,00,000 Dariyapur 19.12.2006 1/2

2. P-6 10403 4/23 15 K 17 M 50,00,000 25,23,659 Dariyapur 17.3.2008 12/3

5 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

3. P-6 51 209// 41 Sq.yards 21,000 24,79,024 Badli 5.4.2002 8 Min

4. P-7 1337 210// 56.38 1,00,000 85,84,604 Badli 26.5.2005 9/1 Sq.yards

5. P-8 351 143// 200 3,00,000 72,60,000 Badli 25.4.2006 3/1 Sq.yards

6. P-9 517 173// 100 sq 1,50,000 72,60,000 Badli 3.5.2006 20/2 yards

7. P-10 1619 801// 220 3,50,000 77,00,000 Badli 23.6.2006 ½ Sq.yards

8. P-11 1722 1013 2 marlas 90,000 72,00,0000 Badli 28.6.2006

9. P-12 1946 188// 8 marlas 3,60,000 72,00,000 Badli 7.7.2006 3/2

10. P-13 2761 143// 8 marlas 3,75,000 75,00,000 Badli 21.8.2006 3/1

11. P-14 3417 456 16 marlas 7,20,000 72,00,000 Badli 27.9.2006

12. P-15 5235 276// 8 Kanal 22,00,000 22,00,000 Badli 4.12.2006 9

13. P-16 5542 198// 79 K 11M 2,18,76,250 22,00,000 Badli 12.12.2006 25 199//

200//

267//

281//

14. P-17 5642 257// 13 K 12 M 37,40,000 22,00,000 Badli 15.12.2006 2

258//

6 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

15. P-18 6382 239// 1K 5,22,500 22,00,000 Badli 8.1.2007 18/2 18 M

16. P-19 6686 305// 11 K 30,25,000 22,00,000 Badli 15.1.2007 11/2

17. P-20 8217 452 17 marlas 7,71,000 72,60,000 Badli 22.2.2007 514 sq.yds

18. P-21 1607 1417 4 marlas 1,80,000 87,12,000 Badli 17.5.2007 1481 100 sq.yds

19. P-22 2323 306// 9K 26,40,000 22,00,000 Badli 7.6.2007 25/3 12 M 310//

311//

348//

20. P-23 6489 229// 10 K 28,60,000 22,00,000 Badli 31.10.2007 19/3 8M

230//

21. P-24 6751 1340 1 marla 54,000 86,40,000 Badli 12.11.2007

22. P-25 10054 188// 7 marlas 3,78,000 86,40,000 Badli 3.3.2008 6

23. P-26 7836 31// 8 Kanal 60,00,000 60,00,000 Kassar 24.2.2006 8

24. P-27 7840 35// 20 K 1,52,62,500 60,00,000 Kassar 24.2.2006 8 7M

32//

7 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

25. P-28 7914 55// 4K 38,33,022 61,94,783 Kassar 1.3.2006 21/1 19 M 56//

65//

26. P-29 7913 55// 24 K 1,91,65,105 62,07,321 Kassar 1.3.2006 21/1 14 M 56//

65//

4.3 On the one hand, the learned counsel representing the

landowners contend that the RC has wrongly ignored the sale deeds in

favour of the Reliance Haryana SEZ Limited. They contend that

two years before the acquisition of the land was proposed, Reliance SEZ

decided to develop a Special Economic Zone in the acquired area. They

submit that such sale deeds cannot be kept out of consideration,

particularly when there is no basis to prove that the price of the land in

the area has been artificially jacked up. Moreover, there was no evidence

to prove that the Reliance is purchasing the property at a rate more

than the market price of the said area. While referring to Ex HC1, the

layout plan, they submit that the sale instances Ex.P16 (bearing no.5542)

and P19 (bearing no.6686) and P22 (bearing no.2323) are near the

Kundali Manesar Highway and the RC has erred in excluding these sale

deeds from consideration. In the alternative, the learned counsel

representing the landowners rely upon the judgment passed in Rajit and

another versus State of Haryana and others RFA-1427 of 2014 and

other connected cases decided on 12th February, 2016. They contend

8 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

that on 19th November, 2004, the preliminary notification to acquire 151

acres, 1 kanal and 11 marlas of land was proposed, to be acquired from

the revenue estate of Village Badli for the construction and development

of the KMP Expressway. They submit that the High Court assessed the

market value at the rate of Rs.19,91,300/- per acre on 19th, November,

2004. They pray for grant of appropriate escalation in the amount for a

period of three years before assessing the market value on the basis of

the aforesaid judgment.

4.4 On the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that

the RC has committed an error in applying the State policy from the date

of award, though, the market value is required to be determined on the

date of preliminary notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act, i.e 7th.

February, 2008.

4.5 This Court has considered the submissions of the learned

counsels representing the parties. It is important to note that on 19th

November, 2004 HSIIDC while proposing to construct the KMP

Expressway the government issued a preliminary notification under

Section 4 read with Section 17 of the 1894 Act. In these appeals, the

acquisition, is for the construction and development of entry/exit roads

from the KMP Expressway at Badli. The notification under Section 4 of

the 1894 Act has been issued after a period of nearly three years. From a

bare look at the layout plan, it is evident that the land has been acquired

on both the sides of the already proposed KMP Expressway. The

acquired land was located near the National Capital, Delhi. On

the Western side of the proposed Highway, the residential area of Village

9 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

Badli is located. It has also come in evidence that the Reliance Company

started purchasing the land in the village Badli and the surrounding

villages in the year 2006 itself. In other words, once the KMP

Expressway was planned, there was a spike in the demand for the

agricultural land for development. It is also evident that Reliance while

executing as many as six sale deeds, which have been produced in

evidence, purchased nearly 17 acres of land at the rate of Rs. 22,00,000/-

per acre. Thus, the landowners had a willing customer, who could

purchase the property at the rate of Rs.22,00,000/- per acre. Though the

parcels of the land representing the aforesaid sale deeds are located at

some distance from the acquired land but the acquired land is near the

already proposed KMP Expressway. Once after planning the construction

of expressway, the acquisition of the land started in the year 2004, the

prices of the adjoining land started increasing. The price would have

been counter balanced even if there would have been some distance in

the acquired land. The RC has erred in ignoring the sale deeds in favor of

Reliance on the ground that Reliance offered a higher price than the

actual market price. It may be noted here that there is no evidence to this

effect. HSIIDC has not examined any official of the Reliance Company

or the vendor to prove this particular fact. The Reliance has purchased

the property by executing the registered sale deed while paying the sale

consideration through the Bank transactions. In the absence of the

cogent evidence to prove that the Reliance had purchased the land at a

rate more than the market value, it was not appropriate for the court to

10 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

ignore the sale deeds, particularly when these were of the comparable

parcels of land located nearby.

4.6 It is evident that the sale instances Ex. P 15 to P. 19 and P 22

and P23 pertain to the period from 4th December, 2006 to 31st October,

2007. The sale deed Ex. P23 (bearing no.6489) is just three months

before the date of preliminary notification ie.7th. February 2008. In

other words, there is no evidence to prove that after 4th, December, 2006

i.e. the date of first purchase by the Reliance SEZ till 31st October. 2007,

there was any increase in the price of the market value of the land.

Hence, the market value of the land is assessed at the rate of

Rs.22,00,000/-per acre. It may be noted here that from a perusal of the

sale deeds in favour of Reliance Company, it is evident that the land

comprised in rectangle No. 199, 899, 200, 267, 281, 239, 305, 306, 348

and 229 has been purchased whereas the acquired land includes the land

comprised in rectangle No. 186, 212 and 230. In terms of the size of the

agricultural land, the unit rectangle is a compact parcel of 25 acres.

4.7 The alternative argument of learned counsel representing

that appellants while referring to the judgment in Rajit's case (supra) is

not substantive. It is evident on the careful reading of the judgment that

the court on the basis of a State policy calculated the amount of

Rs.4,41,293/- by taking the date of award to be the date of assessment of

the market value, which is in violation of the Section 23 of the 1894 Act.

Moreover, the court, after taking into account, the location, awarded

another sum of Rs.3,00,000/- per acre. Though Special Leave Petitions

filed by the landowners were dismissed by the Supreme Court, however,

11 of 14

RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)

the assessment of the market value of the land by the court is not a ratio

decidendi to be followed in a subsequent judgment, unless the court

comes to a conclusion that the facts were identical and both the parcels

of the acquired land were comparable. While assessing the market value,

the court only decides the cases on the basis of evidence produced before

it. Hence, reliance on a previous judgment, should not be given priority

over the sale instances of contemporaneous period and other related

evidence.

4.8 As far as the argument of the learned counsel representing

the State with regard to the date of assessment is concerned, the

argument needs no discussion, particularly when the market value has

been determined only on the basis of sale deeds produced by the parties.

5. Decision:-

5.1 With all these observations, the appeals filed by the

landowners are allowed. The market value of acquired land is assessed at

Rs.22,00,000/- per acre, along with all the statutory benefits. As regards

the additional compensation for the bifurcation of land at the rate of 20

% of the market , there is no scope for interference in the award passed

by the Reference Court.

5.2 All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, are also

disposed of.

14.12.2022                                       (ANIL KSHETARPAL)
rekha                                                 JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned :         Yes/No
Whether reportable :                Yes/No




                                 12 of 14

 RFA-1053-2015 (O&M)


Sr.   Case No.    Parties Details
No.

1. RFA-1053- ROHTAS AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

2. RFA-1054- SUKHBIR AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

3. RFA-1055- ROHTASH V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

4. RFA-1056- SHRI BHAGWAN AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA 2015 AND ORS

5. RFA-1057- SMT. MURTI AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND 2015 ORS

6. RFA-8392- RAM KISHAN AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND 2018 ORS

7. RFA-8457- DAYANAND AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND 2018 ORS

8. RFA-495- HARI RAM (NOW DECEASED) THROUGH HIS LRS 2016 V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

9. RFA-496- SMT. SRIYA (NOW DECEASED) THR. HER LRS V/S 2016 STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

10. RFA-497- SMT. INDRAWATI AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA 2016 AND ORS

11. RFA-498- SMT. INDRAWATI AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA 2016 AND ORS

12. RFA-499- SMT. INDRAWATI V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS