Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 46 (PNJ)

Chetan Singh v. Union of India

2002-01-08

J.S.NARANG

body2002
ORDER J.S. Narang, J. - This appeal has been filed against the award dated 20.11.1985 passed by the Arbitrator upon the reference made by the Government against the compensation awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Collector-cum-competent authority vide award dated 6.3.1975. As per this award the compensation was determined as under :- "Nehri/Chand land @ Rs. 11,000/- per acre Barani @ Rs. 7,500/- per acre Banjar/Gair mumkin @ Rs. 3,840/- per acre" 2. The claimants being dissatisfied with the said award sought reference and accordingly the Government of Punjab made a reference to the Court of Additional District Judge, Bathinda. The reference was considered and the market value was determined by virtue of various judicial pronouncements of this Court and therefore, relying thereupon granted enhancement as under :- Nehri, Chahi & Chahi Master @ Rs. 15,000 per acre Barani @ Rs. 11,000 per acre Banjar/Gair Mumkin land @ Rs. 6,300 per acre" 3. Further reliance has been placed upon a judgment of this Court rendered in Hari Krishan and others v. Union of India, reported as 1975 Punjab and Haryana 74 while granting solatium and interest. 4. The claimants being dissatisfied has filed the present appeals and has sought further enhancement at the rate of Rs. 40,000/- per acre atleast and the maximum of Rs. one lac upon which court fee has been affixed. It may be noticed that additional ad valorem court fee was allowed to be affixed vide order dated September 12, 1990. It has been argued that the matter relating to enhancement sought stands finally decided in view of the judgment rendered by this Court in L.P.A. No. 665 of 1985 decided on 31.10.1996 wherein reliance has been placed upon the judgment in Mehar Singh etc. v. Union of India and others, Civil Appeal No. 1963 of 1987 and Jangiro and others v. Union of India, Civil Appeal No. 1231 and 1232 of 1995 and also Lal Singh and others v. Union of India, S.L.P. No. 2641 of 1985. In the aforesaid judgments, the apex Court has said that the market value of the acquired land is determined at the rate of Rs. 17/- per sq. yard upto a depth of 500 metres from the G.T. road and at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. yard beyond the depth of 500 metres from the G.T. Road. In the aforesaid judgments, the apex Court has said that the market value of the acquired land is determined at the rate of Rs. 17/- per sq. yard upto a depth of 500 metres from the G.T. road and at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. yard beyond the depth of 500 metres from the G.T. Road. The classification of the land has been done away with and the rates so determined by the Land Acquisition Collector have been set aside by the apex Court in the aforesaid judgment. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the aforesaid appeals has emanated from the same area where this land is situated and from the same village i.e. Bibiwala, Tehsil & District Bathinda, Thus, the appellants are also entitled to enhancement of the compensation accordingly. 5. The appeal is allowed in terms of the judgment rendered by the apex Court and by the Division Bench in L.P.A. No. 665 of 1985 decided on 31.10.1996. The resultant effect is that the claimants shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 17/- per sq. yard upto a depth of 500 metres from the main road and beyond 500 metres shall be entitled to compensation at the rate of Rs. 10/- per sq. yard. The compensation so determined shall be payable after deduction of the compensation already received as per the award made by the Special Land Acquisition Collector and so also by the Additional District Judge, Bathinda. It is made clear that if compensation as awarded by the Additional District Judge, Bathinda has not been received, the same shall also merge into enhanced compensation and shall be received by the claimants accordingly. It is further directed that the office shall make the report accordingly as to whether the recommended court fee has already been fixed or not. If there is any deficiency so far, the same shall be deducted from the enhanced compensation. Appeal allowed.