Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1485 (PNJ)

Gur Lal Singh v. Union Of India

2003-10-29

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA

body2003
Judgment Ashutosh Mohunta, J. 1. The claimants have filed the present appeal against the judgment of Additional District Judge, Bathinda dated 8.11.1988. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that vide notification dated 22.2.1984 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (for short the Act) followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the Act (both published on 2.3.1984), the land of the appellant was acquired by the Union of India for the public purpose, namely, for the provision of Code Line in Phus Mandi and Kartar Singh Wala in connection with defence work around Phus Mandi. The Land Acquisition Collector, Jalandhar vide his award dated 22.5.1985 determined the compensation in the following manner:- Nehri Rs.24,000/- per acre. Barani Rs.14,000/- per acre. Gair Mumkin Khal & Gair Mumkin Pahi Rs. 11,000/- per acre. Besides the above, statutory benefits under the Act were also awarded. 3 Dissatisfied with the award of the Land Acquisition Collector, the claimants filed application under Section 18 of the Act before Additional District Judge, Bathinda for determination of the compensation. 4. The Additional District Judge, Bathinda vide his judgment dated 8,11.1988 determined the compensation of the acquired land in the following manner:- "In view of the findings given on the issues framed reference No. 60 which relates to trees is dismissed being without merit as no change in the price of the trees as awarded by the Collector is called for while all other references are accepted to the extent given below but without costs and market value of the land the applications are determined as under:- Nehri Rs. 27,600/- per acre as against Rs. 24,000/-. Barani Rs. 16,100/- per acre as against Rs. 14,000/-. Gair Mumkin Khal Rs. 12,650/- per acre as against Rs. 11,000/-. Gair Mumkin Pahi Rs. 12,650/- per acre as against Rs. 11,000/-. Solatium at the rate of 30% on the enhanced amount of compensation; Other sums at the rate of 12% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation as provided u/s 23(1-a) of the Act; Interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the first year from the date of acquisition and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum, apart." 5 Dis-satisfied with the award of Additional District Judge, Bathinda, the present appeal has been filed. Shri V.K.Kataria, learned counsel for the claimants has argued that Union of India had earlier also acquired land for the same purpose i.e. for setting up of a Railway Line Bye-pass from Railway Station, Phus Mahdi (how known as Bathinda Cantt.) to Railway Station, Kartar Singh Wala in villages Bhagu and Tung-walli, Tehsil and District Bathinda. He contends that the abovesaid land is adjoining the land acquired in the present case and in the case of the village Bhagu Notification was also issued on 2.3.1984 i.e. on the same date as in the present case and, therefore, the compensation, as determined with regard to acquisition of land of village Bhagu, be awarded in the present case also. Learned counsel submits that for the land acquired in village Bhagu which was acquired vide notification dated 2.3.1984, this Court in R.F.A. No. 267 of 1993 has awarded compensation of Rs. 57,760/- per acre or the Chahi land, For the Barani Land compensation has been assessed at Rs. 52,760/- per acre, whereas for Gair Mumkin land, compensation has been evaluated at Rs. 47,760/- per acre. It is contended by the learned counsel that as the land acquired is absolutely adjacent to the land in village Bhagu, and as in the present case and was acquired vide the same notification for the same purpose, therefore, the same compensation as awarded in R.F.A. No. 267 of 1993 titled as Bura Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. be awarded in the present case also. 6. During the pendency of the present appeal, an application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 CPC was filed, wherein it was prayed that the applicant-respondents, namely, Bhag Singh, Kartar Singh. Kamail Singh and Joginder Singh be transposed as appellants instead of respondents. This application was filed vide C.M. No. 923-CI of 1990 and the same was allowed vide order dated 16.11.1990 passed by N.C. Jain, J., whereby the aforementioned applicant-respondents were allowed to be transposed as appellants subject to the condition that Court fee shall be paid by the applicant-respondent in the civil miscellaneous application within a period of two months. The said Court fee has been paid and, therefore, the persons mentioned above in this paragraph are also entitled is receive compensation for their acquired land. 7. The said Court fee has been paid and, therefore, the persons mentioned above in this paragraph are also entitled is receive compensation for their acquired land. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the Stats has not been able to controvert the averments made by counsel for the appellants. 8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that the land acquired in the present ease as well as the land, which was subject matter of decision in RFA No. 367 of 1993, situated in village Bhagu, District Bathinda are contiguous to each others and are similar in nature. Notifications under Section 4 of the Act were also issued on the same date i.e. 2.3.1984 and the purpose of the acquisition was also the same i.e. for the construction of Railway line Bye-Pass from Railway Station Phus Mandi to Railway Station Kartar Singh Wala, therefore, the compensation also should be determined in the same manner as in R.F.A. No. 267 of 1993. 9. For the reasons recorded above, this appeal is allowed to the extent that the appellants shall be entitled to the same compensation as was awarded in R.F.A. No. 267 of 1993 titled as Bum Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.. In other words, the appellants shall be entitled to receive compensation in the following manner:- Chahi land Rs.57,760/- per acre Barani land Rs.52,760/- per acre Gair Mumkin Khal & Gair Mumkin Pahi Rs.47,760/- per acre 10. The appellants shall also be entitled to grant of all the statutory benefits as has been awarded by Additional District Judge, Bathinda vide his impugned judgment. The appeal is allowed in the above terms.