Punjab-Haryana High Court
Avtar Singh vs Pb.State & Ors on 21 November, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147996
CM-5150-CI-2023 in/and 2023:PHHC:147996
RFA-4473-1998 (O&M) 1
101
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CM No.5150-CI of 2023 in/and
RFA No.4473 of 1998 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 21.11.2023
SHRI AVTAR SINGH ......Appellant
Vs
THE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. R.S. Manhas, Advocate
for the applicant-appellant.
Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)
CM No.5150-CI of 2023
Prayer made in this application under Section 151 CPC is for
listing the main appeal for actual date. The main appeal has already been
admitted vide order dated 15.01.1999.
Notice in the application.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab, accepts
notice on behalf the respondents.
With the concurrence of learned counsel for the parties, the
present application is allowed. Main appeal is taken up today.
1. Present appeal has been filed by the appellant to modify the
award dated 05.08.1998 passed by the Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur
(hereinafter to be referred as "Reference Court") seeking further
enhancement of compensation amount.
2. Briefly stating, the land owned by the appellant, situated in
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147996
CM-5150-CI-2023 in/and 2023:PHHC:147996
Village Haroor, Tehsil Pathankot, District Gurdaspur (now Pathankot) was
sought to be acquired vide notification dated 01.02.1993 issued under
Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the
1894 Act') followed by notification dated 09.09.1993, issued under Section
6 thereof. At the time of acquisition of land, certain fruit bearing trees as
well as non-fruit bearing trees existed over the same and a separate award
No.10 dated 21.12.1995 was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector in
exercise of its power under Section 11 of the 1894 Act, in this regard.
3. Being dissatisfied, the appellant-landowner filed reference
seeking enhancement of compensation by invoking Section 18 of the 1894
Act. The aforementioned reference petition came to be dismissed vide
judgment dated 05.08.1998 passed by the Reference Court-cum-Addl.
District Judge, Gurdaspur.
4. By way of present appeal, impugning the aforementioned award
dated 05.08.1998, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
assessment of market value for the fruit bearing as well as non-fruit bearing
trees was made by the Land Acquisition Collector having relied upon
formula dated 15.05.1985 prepared by Dr. G.S. Nijjer, Director of
Horticulture Department, Government of Punjab, Chandigarh. Learned
counsel further submits that the acquisition proceedings in the present case
were initiated vide notification dated 01.02.1993 and thus the assessment of
compensation should have been carried out by giving appropriate increase
from May 1985 to February 1993, by relying upon the price index
prevailing at the relevant point in time. In support, learned counsel for the
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147996
CM-5150-CI-2023 in/and 2023:PHHC:147996
appellant places reliance upon decision dated 02.08.2012 passed in RFA
No.3478 of 1992 in case of "Kartar Singh and Karnail Singh sons of Shri
Kesar Singh son of Shri Kesar Singh successor in interest of late Shri
Kesar, both residents of Village Hardosaran, Tehsil Pathankot Vs.
Punjab State through Collector Gurdaspur and Others".
5. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the
assessment of market value as regards the trees was carried out by the Land
Acquisition Collector having relied upon the formula dated 15.05.1985 and
the time gap between the date of formula and the notification was not much,
thus the appellant was not entitled for any appreciation.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the
paperbook. I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the
appellant.
7. Acquisition in the present case was carried out vide notification
dated 01.02.1993 issued under Section 4 of the 1894 Act and the
assessment of compensation was made on the basis of formula dated
15.05.1985 whereas, undisputedly between 1985-1994 there was sufficent
appreciation in the price index which went from 127 points to 254 points
thereby making increase of 127 per cent over the price assessed by Dr. G.S.
Nijjer in its formula dated 15.05.1985. The aforementioned formula of
increase based on the application of price index, given in favour of
landowners was approved by this Court vide decision dated 02.08.2012
passed in RFA No.3478 of 1992 in case of Kartar Singh (Supra). Relevant
para thereof is reproduced hereunder:-
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147996
CM-5150-CI-2023 in/and 2023:PHHC:147996
"The appeal is for enhancement of compensation for
value of the trees which were lost to the owner by the
acquisition of land. The grievance expressed is that the
Reference Court had accepted the valuation of the trees made
as per the formula called 'Dr. Nijjar's formula' for assessing
the trees for the year 1985. The learned counsel for the
appellants would argue that in Punjab Small Industries and
Export Corporation Limited Versus Zail Singh in RFA
No.1907 of 2002, decided on 28.09.2010, this Court had
factored the increase for assessment of value of trees for the
subsequent years by taking note of the increase in price index.
In this case, the learned counsel argues that as against the
valuation made as per Dr. Nijjar's formula of the year 1985,
the price index had gone from 127 points to 150 points in
1987. This, according to him, would mean an increase of 23%
over the price assessed by the application of Dr. Nijjar's
formula.
2. I adopt the valuation and would provide for 23%
increase on the valuation made as per the application of Dr.
Nijjar's formula........"
8. This Court, even in case of Union of India and another versus
Pritam Singh, 2004(4) RCR (Civil) 5, under similar facts and
circumstances, upheld the increase based on difference of the wholesale
price index.
9. Accordingly, in view of the discussion made hereinabove, the
impugned award dated 05.08.1998, passed by the Reference Court is set
aside and the present appeal is allowed to the extent that based on the
appreciation of price index between 1985 to 1993, the appellant-landowner
shall be entitled for increase of 127% over and above the amount assessed
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147996
CM-5150-CI-2023 in/and 2023:PHHC:147996
by the Land Acquisition Collector vide its award dated 21.12.1995 towards
compensation for the fruit bearing as well as non-fruit bearing trees besides
all other statutory benefits and interests provided as admissible under the
1894 Act.
(HARKESH MANUJA)
November 21, 2023 JUDGE
Atik
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:147996
5 of 5
