State Of Haryana And Others vs Raj Singh And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 560 P&H

       In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh


                           Regular First Appeal No. 4521 of 2017 (O&M)
                                            And Other Connected Cases

                                                    Reserved On: 21.12.2022
                                                 Date of Decision: 12.01.2023


State of Haryana and Others
                                                               ... Appellant(s)

                                        Versus

Raj Singh and Others
                                                             ... Respondent(s)

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kshetarpal.

Present:    Mr. Shivendra Swaroop, Assistant Advocate General,
            Haryana.

            Mr. Chanderhas Yadav and Mr. Jai Prakash Jangu, Advocates
            for the landowners.

Anil Kshetarpal, J.

1. While praying for the modification of the market value of the

acquired land assessed by the Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as

"the RC"), the landowners as well as the State of Haryana have come up in

the appeal. The notifications under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition

Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1894 Act"), the awards passed by

the Land Acquisition Collector (hereinafter referred to as "the LAC") as

well as the RC are common. The learned counsel representing the parties are

also ad idem that this batch of appeals can conveniently be decided by a

common judgment. In fact, all the reference petitions filed by the

landowners were consolidated and the evidence was led in the LAC Case

No. 44 of 2015.

1.2 The relevant particulars, in brief, for the purpose of decision of 1 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

the present case, are as under:-

 S.NO.            TITLE                            DETAILS
   1.  Date of Notification under                  25.01.2013
       Section 4 of the 1894 Act.
   2.  Date of Notification under                  25.06.2013
       Section 6 of the 1894 Act.
   3.  Purpose of Acquisition.      For the construction of a Barkhtabad
                                    Bypass Road.

4. Location, area and nature of The acquired land is located in village the acquired land Barkhtabad, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar.

5. Number and Date of the Vide Award No. 39-J dated Award of the Land 25.09.2013 the LAC acquired land Acquisition Collector. measuring 76 acres and 5 marlas, located in village Barkhtabad, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar.

6. Amount assessed by the Land The LAC has offered to pay the Acquisition Collector. market value of the acquired land located in village Barkhtabad, Tehsil Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar, @ ₹52,00,000/- per acre along with all the statutory benefits.

7. Date of the judgment of the 16.05.2017 Reference Court.

8. Amount determined by the The RC has assessed the market value Reference Court. of the acquired land @ ₹83,15,400/-

per acre.

2. Facts

2.1 It would be appropriate to notice the relevant facts in brief. Not

satisfied with the amount offered by the LAC for the involuntary acquisition

of their land, on the applications of the landowners, 12 cases were referred to

the RC for re-determination. The landowners claimed that the LAC has

failed to assess the market value of the acquired land as many relevant facts,

namely the sale deeds, location, situation and the other development

activities surrounding the acquired land, have not been taken into

consideration. Terming the award passed by the LAC as unjust, unfair,

unreasonable and inadequate, the landowners claimed that the market value 2 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

of the acquired land is more than ₹5,00,00,000/- per acre. It was also

claimed that towards the Eastern side, the acquired land abuts the

Bahadurgarh Bye-pass, whereas, it abuts Sector 37 in the Western side.

Hence, the acquired land could be utilized for the commercial, residential

and industrial purposes.

2.2 On the other hand, the State of Haryana, while contesting the

cases, claimed that the LAC has assessed the just, fair and reasonable

amount of the market value for the acquired land.

2.3 On the appreciation of the pleadings, the following issues were

culled out by the RC for adjudication:-

"1. What was the market value of the acquired land at the

time of notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition

Act, 1894?OPP

2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to enhanced

compensation, if yes, how much?OPP

3. Relief."

3. Evidence Produced by the Respective Parties

3.1 In the oral evidence, the landowners have examined the

following witnesses:-

Sr. No.     Name of the Witness                  Particulars of the Witness
   1.   PW.1 Ramesh                                       Petitioner
   2.   PW.2 Jai Singh                                    Petitioner
   3.   PW.3 Jai Bhagwan                       Registration      Clerk,   Sub
                                               Registrar Office, Bahadurgarh.
      4.   PW.4 Om Parkash                     Record Keeper, Office of Sub
                                               Registrar Office, Bahadurgarh.

3.2          In the documentary evidence, the landowners have produced

the following documents, apart from the sale deeds, a tabulated compilation 3 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

whereof is incorporated in para 5.4 of the judgment:-

Sr. No.   Exhibit Number                Description of the document
   1.     Ex.P4                 Mutation No. 2541
   2.     Ex.P5                 Mutation No. 2414
   3.     Ex.PW.1/4             Affidavit of Ramesh
   4.     Ex.PW.2/A             Affidavit of Jai Singh
   5.     Ex.PW.4/A             Affidavit of Om Parkash

3.3           On the other hand, in the oral evidence, the State has examined

RW.1 Sh.Joginder Singh, Junior Engineer, HSRDC, Jhajjar.

3.4 In the documentary evidence, the HSIIDC has produced the

following documents:-

Sr. No. Exhibit Number                  Description of the document
   1.   Ex.RW.1/A               Affidavit of Joginder Singh
   2.   Mark-A & Mark-          Notification
        B
   3.   Mark-C                  Award No. 39 dated 25.09.2013
   4.   Mark-D                  Statement of the Collector
   5.   Mark-E                  Circumstances of the case
   6.   Mark-F                  Award No. 39-J District Jhajjar for the Year


4             Analysis of the reasons recorded by the RC

4.1           On the careful perusal of the judgment passed by the RC, it is

evident that after noticing that the sale deeds bearing No. 9579 (Ex.PW.3/A),

9450 (Ex.PW.3/B) and 4456 (Ex.PW.3/C) are post 25.01.2013, i.e. the date

of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act still proceeded to calculate

the mean price of the sale deeds (Ex.PW.3/A, Ex.PW.3/B, Ex.PW.3/C and

Ex.PW.4/A). Thereafter, the RC has deducted 1/3rd towards the

development, de-escalation and the waiting period to assess the market value

of the acquired land to ₹83,15,400/- per acre.

4 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

5. Discussion and Analysis of the arguments of the learned counsel representing the parties.

5.1 Heard the learned counsel representing the parties, at length and

with their able assistance, perused the paper-book as well as the record of

the Reference Court, which was requisitioned.

5.2 On the one hand, the learned counsel representing the State of

Haryana contends that the landowners failed to prove that the amount

assessed by the LAC was inadequate. He submits that the RC has committed

an error in calculating the average of four sale deeds (Ex.PW.3/A,

Ex.PW.3/B, Ex.PW.3/C and Ex.PW.4/A). He submits that the sale deeds

(Ex.PW.3/A, Ex.PW.3/B, Ex.PW.3/C) are not only post the date of

notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act but also with respect to the

smaller parcels of plots. He further submits that the sale deed bearing No.

4526 (Ex.PW.4/A) is with respect to a tiny sized plot measuring 6 marlas in

a residential area. Hence, the RC has erred in assessing the market value of

the acquired land @ ₹83,15,400/- per acre.

5.3 On the other hand, the learned counsels representing the

landowners contend that the deduction of 1/3rd applied by the RC is not

appropriate. They submit that at the most 10% deduction could be ordered

from the average price of the aforementioned sale deeds.

5.4 This Court has analyzed the arguments of the learned counsel

representing the parties and has carefully perused the impugned judgment

along with the requisitioned record.

5.5 At this stage, it will be appropriate to compile a tabulated

information of the various sale deeds produced by the landowners, which is

as under:-

5 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

Sr. Exhibit Sale Dated Area Amount Name of Rate Per No. No. Deed (In ₹) Village acre No. (In ₹)

1. Ex.PW.3/A 9579 05.02.2013 1K-2M 16,62,500 Bir 1,20,90,909 Barktabad

2. Ex.PW.3/B 9450 30.01.2013 1K-0M 15,25,000 -do- 1,22,00,000

3. Ex.PW.3/C 4456 29.08.2013 0K-7M 10,50,000 -do- 2,40,00,000

4. Ex.PW.4/A 4526 27.08.2012 0K-6M 5,10,500 -do- 1,36,13,333

5. Ex.PW.4/1 3997 08.09.2015 9K-10M 3,02,81,250 -do- 2,55,00,000

6. Ex.PW.4/3 3983 08.09.2015 16K-0M 5,10,00,000 -do- 2,55,00,000

5.6 On the careful perusal of the sale deeds, it is evident that the

sale deeds (Ex.PW.3/A, Ex.PW.3/B, Ex.PW.3/C, Ex.PW.4/1 and Ex.PW.4/3)

are post the date of preliminary notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act

i.e. 25.01.2013. The sale deeds (Ex.PW.3/A, Ex.PW.3/B and Ex.PW.3/C)

are not expected to be with respect to the agricultural land. The sale deed

(Ex.PW.3/A) is with respect to a plot measuring 1 kanal and 2 marla

(approximately 666 square yards). The sale deed (Ex.PW.3/B) is with respect

to a plot measuring 610 square yards. Similarly, the sale deed (Ex.PW.3/C)

is only with respect to the plot measuring 210 square yards. Hence, it was

not appropriate for the RC to take into account the aforesaid three sale deeds

while assessing the market value of the acquired land, particularly when they

were also the post the date of notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act.

The sale deeds bearing No. 3997 (Ex.PW.4/1) and 3983 (Ex.PW.4/3) are

approximately more than two years and eight months post the date of

notification under Section 4 of the 1894 Act, hence, correctly ignored by the

RC. Moreover, on the careful perusal of the aforesaid sale deeds, it is evident

that the Delhi Catholic Archdiocese (Regd.) through its school, namely

Sahoday Senior Secondary School has purchased the property vide both the

sale deeds. Obviously, the land has not been purchased for the agricultural 6 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

purpose. Now, the Court is left with the sale instance (Ex.PW.4/A:Ex.P.3).

On the careful perusal of the said sale deed, it is evident that the residential

plot measuring 6 marlas in the residential area has been sold on 27.08.2012

for ₹5,10,500/-. This sale deed is not only with respect to a tiny sized plot

but no effort has been made by the learned counsel to prove its comparable

location. As already noticed, the total acquired land is 76 kanals and 5

marlas. In the terms of the units of the agricultural land, ordinarily an acre

of land is comprised of 4840 square yards. An acre of land is further sub-

divided into 8 kanals. Thus, ordinarily, each kanal of land has 605 square

yards approximately. Thereafter, each kanal is sub-divided into 20 marlas.

Thus, each marla consists of 30.25 square yards of land. The sale deed

(Ex.PW.4/A) is only with respect to 180 square yards which is hardly 3.71%

of an acre. Moreover, the total acquired land is approximately 18543 square

yards. The area of sale deed (Ex.PW.4/A) is less than 1% of the total

acquired land. Hence, the reliance placed by the RC on the sale deeds

(Ex.PW.3/A, Ex.PW.3/B, Ex.PW.3/C and Ex.PW.4/A) was not appropriate.

5.7 Once the landowners claim modification of the market value of

the acquired land assessed by the LAC, they are required to prove the

comparable sale instances of the contemporaneous period in order to prove

that the market value assessed by the LAC is not appropriate. No doubt, the

Courts have held that the sale deeds pertaining to a smaller area, in the

absence of any other evidence, can be relied upon, however, it all depends

upon the facts and circumstances of each case. While assessing the market

value of the acquired land, the Court is required to identify a comparable

sale instance of contemporaneous period. Undoubtedly, the Court can rely

7 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

upon the sale instance of a smaller plot after applying the appropriate

deduction, however, this rule does not have a universal application. In para

4 of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Chimanlal

Hargovinddas v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Poona and Another

(1988) 3 SCC 753, the general principles of the assessment of the market

value were culled out which are extracted as under:-

"4. The following factors must be etched on the mental

screen:

(1) A reference under Section 18 of the Land

Acquisition Act is not an appeal against the award and

the Court cannot take into account the material relied

upon by the Land Acquisition officer in his Award unless

the same material is produced and proved before the

Court.

(2) So also the Award of the Land Acquisition officer

is not to be treated as a judgment of the trial Court open

or exposed to challenge before the Court hearing the

Reference. It is merely an offer made by the Land

Acquisition officer and the material utilised by him for

making his valuation cannot be utilised by the Court

unless produced and proved before it. It is not the

function of the Court to suit in appeal against the Award,

approve or disapprove its reasoning, or correct its error

or affirm, modify or reverse the conclusion reached by

the Land Acquisition officer, as if it were an appellate

8 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

court.

(3) The Court has to treat the reference as an original

proceeding before it and determine the market value

afresh on the basis of the material produced before it.

(4) The claimant is in the position of a plaintiff who

has to show that the price offered for his land in the

award is inadequate on the basis of the materials

produced in the Court. Of course the materials placed

and proved by the other side can also be taken into

account for this purpose.

(5) The market value of land under acquisition has to

be determined as on the crucial date of publication of the

notification under sec. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act

(dates of Notifications under secs. 6 and 9 are

irrelevant).

(6) The determination has to be made standing on the

date line of valuation (date of publication of notification

under sec. 4) as if the valuer is a hypothetical purchaser

willing to purchase land from the open market and is

prepared to pay a reasonable price as on that day. It has

also to be assumed that the vendor is willing to sell the

land at a reasonable price.

(7) In doing so by the instances method, the Court has

to correlate the market value reflected in the most

comparable instance which provides the index of market

9 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

value.

(8) only genuine instances have to be taken into

account. (Some times instances are rigged up in

anticipation of Acquisition of land).

(9) Even post notification instances can be taken into

account (1) if they are very proximate,(2) genuine and

(3) the acquisition itself has not motivated the purchaser

to pay a higher price on account of the resultant

improvement in development prospects.

(l0) The most comparable instances out of the genuine

instances have to be identified on the following

considerations:

(i) proximity from time angle,

(ii) proximity from situation angle.

(11) Having identified the instances which provide the

index of market value the price reflected therein may be

taken as the norm and the market value of the land under

acquisition may be deduced by making suitable

adjustments for the plus and minus factors vis-a-vis land

under acquisition by placing the two in juxtaposition.

(12) A balance-sheet of plus and minus factors may be

drawn for this purpose and the relevant factors may be

evaluated in terms of price variation as a prudent

purchaser would do.

(13) The market value of the land under acquisition has

10 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

there after to be deduced by loading the price reflected in

the instance taken as norm for plus factors and

unloading it for minus factors (14) The exercise

indicated in clauses (11) to (13) has to be undertaken in

a common sense manner as a prudent man of the world

of business would do. We may illustrate some such

illustrative (not exhaustive) factors:

                          Plus factors                    Minus factors
                   1. smallness of size           1. largeness of area.
                   2. proximity to a road.        2. situation     in    the
                                                     interior at a distances
                                                     from the Road.
                   3. frontage on a road.         3. narrow strip of land
                                                     with    very   small
                                                     frontage compared to
                                                     death.
                   4. nearness               to   4. lower level requiring
                      developed area.                the depressed portion
                                                     to be filled up.
                   5. regular shape.              5. remoteness         from
                                                     developed locality.
                   6. level vis-a-vis land        6. some           special
                      under acquistion.              disadvantageous
                                                     factor which would
                                                     deter a purchaser.
                   7. special value for an
                      owner      of     an
                      adjoining property
                      to whom it may have
                      some very special
                      advantage.

(15) The evaluation of these factors of course depends

on the facts of each case. There cannot be any hard and

fast or rigid rule. Common sense is the best and most

reliable guide. For instance, take the factor regarding

11 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

the size. A building plot of land say 500 to 1000 sq. yds

cannot be compared with a large tract or block of land of

say l000 sq. yds or more. Firstly while a smaller plot is

within the reach of many, a large block of land will have

to be developed by preparing a lay out, carving out

roads, leaving open space, plotting out smaller plots,

waiting for purchasers (meanwhile the invested money

will be blocked up) and the hazards of an entrepreneur.

The factor can be discounted by making a deduction by

way of an allowance at an appropriate rate ranging

approx. between 20% to 50% to account for land

required to be set apart for carving out lands and

plotting out small plots. The discounting will to some

extent also depend on whether it is a rural area or urban

area, whether building activity is picking up, and

whether waiting period during which the capital of the

entrepreneur would be looked up, will be longer or

shorter and the attendant hazards.

(16) Every case must be dealt with on its own facts

pattern bearing in mind all these factors as a prudent

purchaser of land in which position the Judge must place

himself.

(17) These are general guidelines to be applied with

understanding informed with common sense. The

problem which has surfaced in the present appeals needs

12 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

to be recapitulated. The question is whether in scaling

down the total compensation payable to the appellant

from Rs.1,14,517 to Rs.63,846, the High Court has

violated any principle of valuation or adopted any faulty

methodology."

5.8 In the present case, the land has been acquired for the

construction of a by-pass road, away from the residential area of the village.

The sale deed (Ex.PW.4/A) is a tiny sized plot in the residential area of the

village. There is no evidence that the acquired land also forms the part of the

residential area or is located near the residential area.

6. Decision

6.1 Keeping in view the aforesaid discussion, this Court is left with

no choice but to accept the appeals filed by the State of Haryana, whereas, to

dismiss the appeals filed by the landowners. The award passed by the LAC

requires no modification with regard to the assessment of the market value

of the acquired land.

6.2 The miscellaneous application(s) pending, if any, in all the

appeals, shall stand disposed of.

(Anil Kshetarpal) Judge January 12, 2023 "DK"

Whether speaking/reasoned :Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name

1. RFA-4444-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S RAJ SINGH AND OTHERS

2. RFA-4448-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S KHAZAN SINGH

3. RFA-4522-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SAMAY SINGH AND OTHERS 13 of 14

And Other Connected Cases

Sr. No. Case No. Party's Name

4. RFA-688-2018 OM PARKASH AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

5. RFA-691-2018 JAI PARKASH AND ANR V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

6. RFA-692-2018 NIRMLA AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

7. RFA-693-2018 RAJ SINGH AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

8. RFA-4449-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S OM PARKASH AND OTHERS

9. RFA-695-2018 JAI SINGH AND ANR V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

10. RFA-696-2018 KHAZAN SINGH V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

11. RFA-2796-2018 RAJINDER SINGH AND ANR V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

12. RFA-4520-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S RAJINDER SINGH AND ANOTHER

13. RFA-4443-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S JAI PARKASH AND ANOTHER

14. RFA-4447-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SMT.

NIRMALA AND OTHERS

15. RFA-4442-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SMT. BHARPAI AND OTHERS

16. RFA-687-2018 SAMAY SINGH AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

17. RFA-690-2018 SAKUNTALA DECEASED THROUGH HER LRSAND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

18. RFA-694-2018 BHARPAI AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

19. RFA-4446-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S JAI SINGH AND ANOTHER

20. RFA-4450-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S PARMILA DEVI

21. RFA-2744-2018 PARMILA DEVI V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

22. RFA-689-2018 RAJ SINGH AND ORS V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS

23. RFA-4445-2017 STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS V/S SMT.

SAKUNTALA DECEASED THROUGH HER LRS AND OTHERS

(Anil Kshetarpal) Judge January 12, 2023 "DK"

14 of 14